<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_07_13_2243233</id>
	<title>Pandora Wants Radio Stations To Pay For Music, Too</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1247500560000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>suraj.sun sends along an Ars writeup of the lobbying Pandora is doing now that it has <a href="//news.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/07/08/1339224&amp;tid=236">secured its future</a>, royalties-wise. Some might think it odd that Pandora is <a href="http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2009/07/pandora-now-pushing-radio-to-pay-for-music-too.ars">weighing in on the side of the record labels</a> in their fight to get radio stations to pay more for the music they broadcast. <i>"US radio stations don't pay performers and producers for the music they play, but the recording industry hopes to change that with a new performance rights bill in Congress. Webcaster Pandora has jumped into the fray on the side of the artists and labels, asking why radio gets a free ride when Pandora does not. ... With revenues from recorded music sales declining, rights-holders have turned their eyes in recent years to commercial US radio, which currently pays songwriters (but not performers or record labels)...  With its own future secure for the next few years, Pandora is now turning its attention to the public performance debate here in the US, saying that the issue is a simple matter of fairness: why should webcasters have to pay more for music than traditional radio does? ... [But] the 'fairness' argument could clearly go either way. Radio might start paying a performance right; on the other hand, perhaps webcasters and satellite radio companies should simply stop paying one, relying on the old argument about promotion."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>suraj.sun sends along an Ars writeup of the lobbying Pandora is doing now that it has secured its future , royalties-wise .
Some might think it odd that Pandora is weighing in on the side of the record labels in their fight to get radio stations to pay more for the music they broadcast .
" US radio stations do n't pay performers and producers for the music they play , but the recording industry hopes to change that with a new performance rights bill in Congress .
Webcaster Pandora has jumped into the fray on the side of the artists and labels , asking why radio gets a free ride when Pandora does not .
... With revenues from recorded music sales declining , rights-holders have turned their eyes in recent years to commercial US radio , which currently pays songwriters ( but not performers or record labels ) ... With its own future secure for the next few years , Pandora is now turning its attention to the public performance debate here in the US , saying that the issue is a simple matter of fairness : why should webcasters have to pay more for music than traditional radio does ?
... [ But ] the 'fairness ' argument could clearly go either way .
Radio might start paying a performance right ; on the other hand , perhaps webcasters and satellite radio companies should simply stop paying one , relying on the old argument about promotion .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>suraj.sun sends along an Ars writeup of the lobbying Pandora is doing now that it has secured its future, royalties-wise.
Some might think it odd that Pandora is weighing in on the side of the record labels in their fight to get radio stations to pay more for the music they broadcast.
"US radio stations don't pay performers and producers for the music they play, but the recording industry hopes to change that with a new performance rights bill in Congress.
Webcaster Pandora has jumped into the fray on the side of the artists and labels, asking why radio gets a free ride when Pandora does not.
... With revenues from recorded music sales declining, rights-holders have turned their eyes in recent years to commercial US radio, which currently pays songwriters (but not performers or record labels)...  With its own future secure for the next few years, Pandora is now turning its attention to the public performance debate here in the US, saying that the issue is a simple matter of fairness: why should webcasters have to pay more for music than traditional radio does?
... [But] the 'fairness' argument could clearly go either way.
Radio might start paying a performance right; on the other hand, perhaps webcasters and satellite radio companies should simply stop paying one, relying on the old argument about promotion.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28701267</id>
	<title>Re:so let's get this straight</title>
	<author>bhiestand</author>
	<datestamp>1247653680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You should try <a href="http://www.somafm.com/" title="somafm.com">somafm</a> [somafm.com] if you haven't already.  I feel the same way about most indie music, but I'm a pretty big Groove Salad fan.  My father and I both listen to it.  We've even bought some CDs of the good stuff I've found on it.  (Dzihan &amp; Kamien, Groove Armada, Baby Mammoth, Mr. Scruff)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You should try somafm [ somafm.com ] if you have n't already .
I feel the same way about most indie music , but I 'm a pretty big Groove Salad fan .
My father and I both listen to it .
We 've even bought some CDs of the good stuff I 've found on it .
( Dzihan &amp; Kamien , Groove Armada , Baby Mammoth , Mr. Scruff )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You should try somafm [somafm.com] if you haven't already.
I feel the same way about most indie music, but I'm a pretty big Groove Salad fan.
My father and I both listen to it.
We've even bought some CDs of the good stuff I've found on it.
(Dzihan &amp; Kamien, Groove Armada, Baby Mammoth, Mr. Scruff)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687089</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686655</id>
	<title>New Model - Bill everyone</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247507040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just give up and bill everyone:<br><br>Bill the artists for making it and everytime it's played.<br>Bill the distributor and packaging plant.<br>Bill the radio stations for playing it.<br>Bill the store for selling it.<br>Bill the Moving Picture Experts Group when it's moved digitally.<br>Bill your mom.<br>Bill the listener for liking it.<br>Bill them if they don't like it.<br>Bill Microsoft and Al Gore for bringing the internet.<br>Bill Apple and the beatles.<br>Bill Linux just cause.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...and when they don't pay: Sue them.<br><br>This Greed -  It's becoming bloody disgusting.<br><br>---<br>"Don't be too troubled. He'll be all right now. He left a packet for you.<br>There it is!"</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just give up and bill everyone : Bill the artists for making it and everytime it 's played.Bill the distributor and packaging plant.Bill the radio stations for playing it.Bill the store for selling it.Bill the Moving Picture Experts Group when it 's moved digitally.Bill your mom.Bill the listener for liking it.Bill them if they do n't like it.Bill Microsoft and Al Gore for bringing the internet.Bill Apple and the beatles.Bill Linux just cause .
...and when they do n't pay : Sue them.This Greed - It 's becoming bloody disgusting.--- " Do n't be too troubled .
He 'll be all right now .
He left a packet for you.There it is !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just give up and bill everyone:Bill the artists for making it and everytime it's played.Bill the distributor and packaging plant.Bill the radio stations for playing it.Bill the store for selling it.Bill the Moving Picture Experts Group when it's moved digitally.Bill your mom.Bill the listener for liking it.Bill them if they don't like it.Bill Microsoft and Al Gore for bringing the internet.Bill Apple and the beatles.Bill Linux just cause.
...and when they don't pay: Sue them.This Greed -  It's becoming bloody disgusting.---"Don't be too troubled.
He'll be all right now.
He left a packet for you.There it is!
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28689153</id>
	<title>Re:All For It</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247578020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This would be cool if it is how it actually works. If it works like it does with internet radio, You will still have to pay Sound Exchange because congress has mandated they are to collect royalties for all labels (indie or not). Of course then it is up to label to get their money from sound exchange.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This would be cool if it is how it actually works .
If it works like it does with internet radio , You will still have to pay Sound Exchange because congress has mandated they are to collect royalties for all labels ( indie or not ) .
Of course then it is up to label to get their money from sound exchange .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This would be cool if it is how it actually works.
If it works like it does with internet radio, You will still have to pay Sound Exchange because congress has mandated they are to collect royalties for all labels (indie or not).
Of course then it is up to label to get their money from sound exchange.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686833</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686509</id>
	<title>Subterfuge</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247505780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Im surprised by how many are upset over this.  Think about it for a minute, the vast majority are still clueless when it comes to the actions of the Music Industry, Pandora no doubt sees this as an opportunity to bring awareness to the masses of an archaic system thats time has passed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Im surprised by how many are upset over this .
Think about it for a minute , the vast majority are still clueless when it comes to the actions of the Music Industry , Pandora no doubt sees this as an opportunity to bring awareness to the masses of an archaic system thats time has passed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Im surprised by how many are upset over this.
Think about it for a minute, the vast majority are still clueless when it comes to the actions of the Music Industry, Pandora no doubt sees this as an opportunity to bring awareness to the masses of an archaic system thats time has passed.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28689807</id>
	<title>Re:An anti-RIAA-SoundExchange copyright licence</title>
	<author>Larryish</author>
	<datestamp>1247580840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Thank you for your contribution to the cause.</p><p>We'll get Stallman on it right away.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thank you for your contribution to the cause.We 'll get Stallman on it right away .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thank you for your contribution to the cause.We'll get Stallman on it right away.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687061</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686631</id>
	<title>Re:Contact your state senator!!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247506800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wait ur saying the radio could get WORSE? I say we vote for it and see if that is at all possible. I dont think it can be done unless Lady Gaga releases 5 more singles and they too get more play value than michael jackson got the day he died.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wait ur saying the radio could get WORSE ?
I say we vote for it and see if that is at all possible .
I dont think it can be done unless Lady Gaga releases 5 more singles and they too get more play value than michael jackson got the day he died .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wait ur saying the radio could get WORSE?
I say we vote for it and see if that is at all possible.
I dont think it can be done unless Lady Gaga releases 5 more singles and they too get more play value than michael jackson got the day he died.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686371</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686445</id>
	<title>olde tyme radio</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247505300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>wishing they could go back to the days when the DJs took money from the producers and promoters to play songs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>wishing they could go back to the days when the DJs took money from the producers and promoters to play songs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>wishing they could go back to the days when the DJs took money from the producers and promoters to play songs.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686809</id>
	<title>Declining?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247508240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The free dutch newspaper "De pers" had an intresting article about music sales yesterday. Or rather not about music sales at all which is probably why the copier (oops sorry journalist) failed to make the connection.
</p><p>The story? A pension fund was reporting they made 8\% profit last year, when the entire economy had collapsed, on their music portfolio. The article told that music rights are big business with a steady reliable revenue stream and that after 10 years you have made enough profit to have paid for the purchase of the rights and from then on its pure profits.
</p><p>But yeah, music sales are declining.
</p><p>How can music be an extremely reliable investment for pension funds when the sales are going down? The only similar reliable investment is in things like supermarkets because people always got to eat.
</p><p>How can you tell someone from the content industry is lying? They got their mouth open.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The free dutch newspaper " De pers " had an intresting article about music sales yesterday .
Or rather not about music sales at all which is probably why the copier ( oops sorry journalist ) failed to make the connection .
The story ?
A pension fund was reporting they made 8 \ % profit last year , when the entire economy had collapsed , on their music portfolio .
The article told that music rights are big business with a steady reliable revenue stream and that after 10 years you have made enough profit to have paid for the purchase of the rights and from then on its pure profits .
But yeah , music sales are declining .
How can music be an extremely reliable investment for pension funds when the sales are going down ?
The only similar reliable investment is in things like supermarkets because people always got to eat .
How can you tell someone from the content industry is lying ?
They got their mouth open .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The free dutch newspaper "De pers" had an intresting article about music sales yesterday.
Or rather not about music sales at all which is probably why the copier (oops sorry journalist) failed to make the connection.
The story?
A pension fund was reporting they made 8\% profit last year, when the entire economy had collapsed, on their music portfolio.
The article told that music rights are big business with a steady reliable revenue stream and that after 10 years you have made enough profit to have paid for the purchase of the rights and from then on its pure profits.
But yeah, music sales are declining.
How can music be an extremely reliable investment for pension funds when the sales are going down?
The only similar reliable investment is in things like supermarkets because people always got to eat.
How can you tell someone from the content industry is lying?
They got their mouth open.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28692395</id>
	<title>Re:New Model - Bill everyone</title>
	<author>tkrotchko</author>
	<datestamp>1247592060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your argument boils down to this... there is no real difference between the record companies trying to maximize revenue and consumers who would just as soon take it for free if possible.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your argument boils down to this... there is no real difference between the record companies trying to maximize revenue and consumers who would just as soon take it for free if possible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your argument boils down to this... there is no real difference between the record companies trying to maximize revenue and consumers who would just as soon take it for free if possible.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28688377</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686557</id>
	<title>People still listen to music radio?</title>
	<author>Gothmolly</author>
	<datestamp>1247506080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I thought that went the way of the dodo.  You can't get FM on the iPod, and who doesn't have a CD player or mp3 jack in their car?   Who gives a crap about shitty-sounding distorted 'loud' FM pop music?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought that went the way of the dodo .
You ca n't get FM on the iPod , and who does n't have a CD player or mp3 jack in their car ?
Who gives a crap about shitty-sounding distorted 'loud ' FM pop music ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought that went the way of the dodo.
You can't get FM on the iPod, and who doesn't have a CD player or mp3 jack in their car?
Who gives a crap about shitty-sounding distorted 'loud' FM pop music?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28699841</id>
	<title>Get a quid-pro-quo</title>
	<author>Tim\_the\_minstrel</author>
	<datestamp>1247590260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Phonograms were originally considered merely an alternate form of musical notation, such as a MIDI sequence could be thought of today.  This was because the first phonograms were piano rolls, which indeed were little other than an alternative form of notation.   Hence the 1909 Copyright Act did not consider them copyrightable separately from the underlying music.  Recording technology quickly made this view obsolete, but it took decades for the law to catch up.  This is why there is no public performance right in most sound recordings.</p><p>Creating a public performance right in all sound recordings would make the statute more consistent.  But we shouldn't let the robber barons get something for nothing.  The new right would be an expansion in the scope of copyright.  The quid-pro-quo should be a contraction in copyright's scope elsewhere (such as an expanded margin of fair use) or a reduction in the duration of copyright, from life-plus-70 down to life-plus-60 or life-plus-50.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Phonograms were originally considered merely an alternate form of musical notation , such as a MIDI sequence could be thought of today .
This was because the first phonograms were piano rolls , which indeed were little other than an alternative form of notation .
Hence the 1909 Copyright Act did not consider them copyrightable separately from the underlying music .
Recording technology quickly made this view obsolete , but it took decades for the law to catch up .
This is why there is no public performance right in most sound recordings.Creating a public performance right in all sound recordings would make the statute more consistent .
But we should n't let the robber barons get something for nothing .
The new right would be an expansion in the scope of copyright .
The quid-pro-quo should be a contraction in copyright 's scope elsewhere ( such as an expanded margin of fair use ) or a reduction in the duration of copyright , from life-plus-70 down to life-plus-60 or life-plus-50 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Phonograms were originally considered merely an alternate form of musical notation, such as a MIDI sequence could be thought of today.
This was because the first phonograms were piano rolls, which indeed were little other than an alternative form of notation.
Hence the 1909 Copyright Act did not consider them copyrightable separately from the underlying music.
Recording technology quickly made this view obsolete, but it took decades for the law to catch up.
This is why there is no public performance right in most sound recordings.Creating a public performance right in all sound recordings would make the statute more consistent.
But we shouldn't let the robber barons get something for nothing.
The new right would be an expansion in the scope of copyright.
The quid-pro-quo should be a contraction in copyright's scope elsewhere (such as an expanded margin of fair use) or a reduction in the duration of copyright, from life-plus-70 down to life-plus-60 or life-plus-50.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686323</id>
	<title>SUCK MY DICK</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247504280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>you faggots</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>you faggots</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you faggots</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28690323</id>
	<title>Re:New Model - Bill everyone</title>
	<author>Jason Levine</author>
	<datestamp>1247583060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You forgot: Sue the companies for allowing employees to play music.  (ala <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090709/1827455502.shtml" title="techdirt.com">http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090709/1827455502.shtml</a> [techdirt.com] )</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You forgot : Sue the companies for allowing employees to play music .
( ala http : //www.techdirt.com/articles/20090709/1827455502.shtml [ techdirt.com ] )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You forgot: Sue the companies for allowing employees to play music.
(ala http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20090709/1827455502.shtml [techdirt.com] )</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686655</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686369</id>
	<title>US of A-centric</title>
	<author>Prince of Sarcasm</author>
	<datestamp>1247504700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Perhaps Canada is a leading the way on fees for once? (see <a href="http://excesscopyright.blogspot.com/2009/07/sac-double-negative-option.html" title="blogspot.com" rel="nofollow">bullet 6</a> [blogspot.com])</htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps Canada is a leading the way on fees for once ?
( see bullet 6 [ blogspot.com ] )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps Canada is a leading the way on fees for once?
(see bullet 6 [blogspot.com])</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28691789</id>
	<title>Go Pandora!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247589540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Broadcast radio tried to kill internet/satellite radio by siding with the RIAA folks, so now they turn the tables back on them.</p><p>Pandora is smart.  This puts them on the same basis as the radio stations, limiting their competition.  If the stations drop/reduce music, it will hurt sales for these RIAA artists (really for the RIAA, since the artists get squat anyway).  This, in turn, hurts the RIAA (possibly more than the stations).  They are trying to get the RIAA to kill the goose laying their golden eggs.  Pandora does good with independent artists, so really doesn't need the RIAA very much.</p><p>It's almost like Daffy Duck pitting the Dog and Foghorn Leghorn against each other...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Broadcast radio tried to kill internet/satellite radio by siding with the RIAA folks , so now they turn the tables back on them.Pandora is smart .
This puts them on the same basis as the radio stations , limiting their competition .
If the stations drop/reduce music , it will hurt sales for these RIAA artists ( really for the RIAA , since the artists get squat anyway ) .
This , in turn , hurts the RIAA ( possibly more than the stations ) .
They are trying to get the RIAA to kill the goose laying their golden eggs .
Pandora does good with independent artists , so really does n't need the RIAA very much.It 's almost like Daffy Duck pitting the Dog and Foghorn Leghorn against each other.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Broadcast radio tried to kill internet/satellite radio by siding with the RIAA folks, so now they turn the tables back on them.Pandora is smart.
This puts them on the same basis as the radio stations, limiting their competition.
If the stations drop/reduce music, it will hurt sales for these RIAA artists (really for the RIAA, since the artists get squat anyway).
This, in turn, hurts the RIAA (possibly more than the stations).
They are trying to get the RIAA to kill the goose laying their golden eggs.
Pandora does good with independent artists, so really doesn't need the RIAA very much.It's almost like Daffy Duck pitting the Dog and Foghorn Leghorn against each other...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686897</id>
	<title>bmi/ascap</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247509080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's been a while since I had anything to do with broadcasting, but it used to be that stations had to have licenses from BMI and ASCAP for public performance rights.  What ever happened to that?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's been a while since I had anything to do with broadcasting , but it used to be that stations had to have licenses from BMI and ASCAP for public performance rights .
What ever happened to that ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's been a while since I had anything to do with broadcasting, but it used to be that stations had to have licenses from BMI and ASCAP for public performance rights.
What ever happened to that?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28705545</id>
	<title>Re:Gotta agree here</title>
	<author>Ol Olsoc</author>
	<datestamp>1247682720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This all leads somewhere. And it ain't pretty. If we take intellectual property to the point where everyone has to pay every time they hear a song, it won't be too long before a lot of people just give up and don't listen. The free playing (listening)of songs is the best advertisement there is. I cruise Youtube and often buy a copy of what I hear and like. So Warner Bros doesn't get any of my listening time.
<p>
If venues - Radio stations, IRadio, and others - are treated like the end use of the product, and not as advertisement for sales, then there will be less of it played, and less sold eventually.
</p><p>
It's amazing that they want us to pay more or less directly for the advertisement. What is next, do autos that drive by outdoor concerts have to be billed for the possibility that they heard the intellectual property? Maybe they should charge by the note.....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This all leads somewhere .
And it ai n't pretty .
If we take intellectual property to the point where everyone has to pay every time they hear a song , it wo n't be too long before a lot of people just give up and do n't listen .
The free playing ( listening ) of songs is the best advertisement there is .
I cruise Youtube and often buy a copy of what I hear and like .
So Warner Bros does n't get any of my listening time .
If venues - Radio stations , IRadio , and others - are treated like the end use of the product , and not as advertisement for sales , then there will be less of it played , and less sold eventually .
It 's amazing that they want us to pay more or less directly for the advertisement .
What is next , do autos that drive by outdoor concerts have to be billed for the possibility that they heard the intellectual property ?
Maybe they should charge by the note.... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This all leads somewhere.
And it ain't pretty.
If we take intellectual property to the point where everyone has to pay every time they hear a song, it won't be too long before a lot of people just give up and don't listen.
The free playing (listening)of songs is the best advertisement there is.
I cruise Youtube and often buy a copy of what I hear and like.
So Warner Bros doesn't get any of my listening time.
If venues - Radio stations, IRadio, and others - are treated like the end use of the product, and not as advertisement for sales, then there will be less of it played, and less sold eventually.
It's amazing that they want us to pay more or less directly for the advertisement.
What is next, do autos that drive by outdoor concerts have to be billed for the possibility that they heard the intellectual property?
Maybe they should charge by the note.....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686917</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687323</id>
	<title>Re:so let's get this straight</title>
	<author>norpy</author>
	<datestamp>1247515020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> Services like last.fm and Pandora only suggest music you already know about anyway.</p></div><p>I'm not even in a regieon that can listen to pandora and even I know that pandora definately plays music you don't necessarilt know about. I can tell it about a single track and it won't just play that on repeat, that would be dumb.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Services like last.fm and Pandora only suggest music you already know about anyway.I 'm not even in a regieon that can listen to pandora and even I know that pandora definately plays music you do n't necessarilt know about .
I can tell it about a single track and it wo n't just play that on repeat , that would be dumb .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Services like last.fm and Pandora only suggest music you already know about anyway.I'm not even in a regieon that can listen to pandora and even I know that pandora definately plays music you don't necessarilt know about.
I can tell it about a single track and it won't just play that on repeat, that would be dumb.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687089</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28692175</id>
	<title>Pandora is a jukebox, not radio</title>
	<author>Ilgaz</author>
	<datestamp>1247591220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Pandora is a jukebox. Yes a Jukebox with high technology. There is no similarity with a radio, even if the radio is web only broadcast.</p><p>Radios multicast since they were invented. If the entire planet somehow had multicast capability, could pandora multicast? No. They are streaming aac files to individuals, each individual gets their unique stream.</p><p>IMHO, after Last.fm backed by CBS giant went payware in markets excluding USA, UK etc., they also figured they won't really stay afloat with that kind of bandwidth use. As they see thousands of users coming from last.fm because it faced the sad reality mostly because of stupid advertisers can't understand where World is heading to, they now try to trick justice system also somehow troubling REAL RADIO which has nothing to do with them.</p><p>If anyone can confuse last.fm, pandora with a real traditional radio, I would be really surprised. The closest thing to real radio on that 'AI' fashion was Spinner which got acquired by AOL and wasted as usual. It was airing (!) same track on its channels.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Pandora is a jukebox .
Yes a Jukebox with high technology .
There is no similarity with a radio , even if the radio is web only broadcast.Radios multicast since they were invented .
If the entire planet somehow had multicast capability , could pandora multicast ?
No. They are streaming aac files to individuals , each individual gets their unique stream.IMHO , after Last.fm backed by CBS giant went payware in markets excluding USA , UK etc. , they also figured they wo n't really stay afloat with that kind of bandwidth use .
As they see thousands of users coming from last.fm because it faced the sad reality mostly because of stupid advertisers ca n't understand where World is heading to , they now try to trick justice system also somehow troubling REAL RADIO which has nothing to do with them.If anyone can confuse last.fm , pandora with a real traditional radio , I would be really surprised .
The closest thing to real radio on that 'AI ' fashion was Spinner which got acquired by AOL and wasted as usual .
It was airing ( !
) same track on its channels .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pandora is a jukebox.
Yes a Jukebox with high technology.
There is no similarity with a radio, even if the radio is web only broadcast.Radios multicast since they were invented.
If the entire planet somehow had multicast capability, could pandora multicast?
No. They are streaming aac files to individuals, each individual gets their unique stream.IMHO, after Last.fm backed by CBS giant went payware in markets excluding USA, UK etc., they also figured they won't really stay afloat with that kind of bandwidth use.
As they see thousands of users coming from last.fm because it faced the sad reality mostly because of stupid advertisers can't understand where World is heading to, they now try to trick justice system also somehow troubling REAL RADIO which has nothing to do with them.If anyone can confuse last.fm, pandora with a real traditional radio, I would be really surprised.
The closest thing to real radio on that 'AI' fashion was Spinner which got acquired by AOL and wasted as usual.
It was airing (!
) same track on its channels.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28693615</id>
	<title>Re:Obvious to anyone other than me?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247596980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're failing to make a free market assumption. The cost of licensing music will have to drop precipitously, which means that internet radio will again be free. Broadcast radio will remain free, the artist can't get fucked any harder by the recording studios. Win Win for the cartel and internet radio.</p><p>However, the real winner here is independent artists. If the broadcast stations have to pay, then they're much more motivated to negotiate with independent artists, who will get "screwed" by low rates on radio v.s. the cartel. However, the stations will play independents over cartel music, since it's cheaper. Win-win for independent bands and broadcast radio.</p><p>Notice that this will not change, in any substantial way, the quality of music, unless you believe that independent music is inherently better.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're failing to make a free market assumption .
The cost of licensing music will have to drop precipitously , which means that internet radio will again be free .
Broadcast radio will remain free , the artist ca n't get fucked any harder by the recording studios .
Win Win for the cartel and internet radio.However , the real winner here is independent artists .
If the broadcast stations have to pay , then they 're much more motivated to negotiate with independent artists , who will get " screwed " by low rates on radio v.s .
the cartel .
However , the stations will play independents over cartel music , since it 's cheaper .
Win-win for independent bands and broadcast radio.Notice that this will not change , in any substantial way , the quality of music , unless you believe that independent music is inherently better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're failing to make a free market assumption.
The cost of licensing music will have to drop precipitously, which means that internet radio will again be free.
Broadcast radio will remain free, the artist can't get fucked any harder by the recording studios.
Win Win for the cartel and internet radio.However, the real winner here is independent artists.
If the broadcast stations have to pay, then they're much more motivated to negotiate with independent artists, who will get "screwed" by low rates on radio v.s.
the cartel.
However, the stations will play independents over cartel music, since it's cheaper.
Win-win for independent bands and broadcast radio.Notice that this will not change, in any substantial way, the quality of music, unless you believe that independent music is inherently better.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687085</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686841</id>
	<title>Reverse Payola?</title>
	<author>Anna Merikin</author>
	<datestamp>1247508540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Only a few months ago, it was charged in the US Congress that record companies have been paying radio stations (again, like in the fifties) to play their records.</p><p>Now they want the stations to pay them?</p><p>Playing a recording on the air is better than advertising it, and the record companies know it.</p><p>This effort is bound to fail, if not ignite laughter.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Only a few months ago , it was charged in the US Congress that record companies have been paying radio stations ( again , like in the fifties ) to play their records.Now they want the stations to pay them ? Playing a recording on the air is better than advertising it , and the record companies know it.This effort is bound to fail , if not ignite laughter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Only a few months ago, it was charged in the US Congress that record companies have been paying radio stations (again, like in the fifties) to play their records.Now they want the stations to pay them?Playing a recording on the air is better than advertising it, and the record companies know it.This effort is bound to fail, if not ignite laughter.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28693191</id>
	<title>Re:Radio Stations are already fighting this.</title>
	<author>floodo1</author>
	<datestamp>1247595360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why does anyone get payed by the radio stations? `ZOMG they're making money off of my IP` and the artist is benefiting by getting the exposure. But that's not enough, because you know who cares if your music gets out and makes people feel good? It's waaay more important to make sure that no radio station can make a buck (off of selling advertising) by playing my songs!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/Ridiculous. Play music because you love it, and figure out some way to make money besides OWNING your music, and being a greedy bastard. "Hey guys I made some awesome art, but you can't experience it without paying me first" is the most ridiculous sentiment ever.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why does anyone get payed by the radio stations ?
` ZOMG they 're making money off of my IP ` and the artist is benefiting by getting the exposure .
But that 's not enough , because you know who cares if your music gets out and makes people feel good ?
It 's waaay more important to make sure that no radio station can make a buck ( off of selling advertising ) by playing my songs !
/Ridiculous. Play music because you love it , and figure out some way to make money besides OWNING your music , and being a greedy bastard .
" Hey guys I made some awesome art , but you ca n't experience it without paying me first " is the most ridiculous sentiment ever .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why does anyone get payed by the radio stations?
`ZOMG they're making money off of my IP` and the artist is benefiting by getting the exposure.
But that's not enough, because you know who cares if your music gets out and makes people feel good?
It's waaay more important to make sure that no radio station can make a buck (off of selling advertising) by playing my songs!
/Ridiculous. Play music because you love it, and figure out some way to make money besides OWNING your music, and being a greedy bastard.
"Hey guys I made some awesome art, but you can't experience it without paying me first" is the most ridiculous sentiment ever.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686805</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686863</id>
	<title>listen live music radio</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247508720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Detectives and Mysteries oldtime radio old radio Golden Days of Radio Nostalgia<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... These are Easy Listening Beautiful Music Favorites! Listen to selections
marknik

<a href="http://maps.google.ca/maps?hl=en&amp;ie=UTF-8&amp;q=carpet+steam+cleaning+toronto&amp;fb=1&amp;split=1&amp;gl=ca&amp;view=text&amp;latlng=14228318974650041004&amp;dtab=0&amp;ei=I7laSvX0HIn6NaLIlL0B&amp;oi=&amp;sa=X" title="google.ca" rel="nofollow"> Carpet Cleaning Toronto</a> [google.ca]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Detectives and Mysteries oldtime radio old radio Golden Days of Radio Nostalgia ... These are Easy Listening Beautiful Music Favorites !
Listen to selections marknik Carpet Cleaning Toronto [ google.ca ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Detectives and Mysteries oldtime radio old radio Golden Days of Radio Nostalgia ... These are Easy Listening Beautiful Music Favorites!
Listen to selections
marknik

 Carpet Cleaning Toronto [google.ca]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28688893</id>
	<title>Re:All For It</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247575980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> giving radio a compelling reason to play independent artists is exactly what we need. They can only hurt themselves.</p></div> </blockquote><p>Except that the group that collects the royalties collects regardless of whether the music you play is composed/produced/performed independent or RIAA member's. The lovely laws, at least in the US, are such that the collections for ALL artists go through them whether the artists want them to or not.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>giving radio a compelling reason to play independent artists is exactly what we need .
They can only hurt themselves .
Except that the group that collects the royalties collects regardless of whether the music you play is composed/produced/performed independent or RIAA member 's .
The lovely laws , at least in the US , are such that the collections for ALL artists go through them whether the artists want them to or not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> giving radio a compelling reason to play independent artists is exactly what we need.
They can only hurt themselves.
Except that the group that collects the royalties collects regardless of whether the music you play is composed/produced/performed independent or RIAA member's.
The lovely laws, at least in the US, are such that the collections for ALL artists go through them whether the artists want them to or not.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686833</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687093</id>
	<title>Re:People still listen to music radio?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247512140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I thought that went the way of the dodo.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
Can we please stop using this hackneyed phrase? For god's sake it wasn't even clever the first time.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought that went the way of the dodo .
Can we please stop using this hackneyed phrase ?
For god 's sake it was n't even clever the first time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought that went the way of the dodo.
Can we please stop using this hackneyed phrase?
For god's sake it wasn't even clever the first time.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686557</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28691703</id>
	<title>Re:All For It</title>
	<author>hypergreatthing</author>
	<datestamp>1247589300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah you don't really get it.  Here in the states it's a compulsory license, meaning even if you only play unlicensed indie music which you have written consent from the artists themselves you are still required to pay sound exchange.</p><p>So there goes your theory of how it hurts the RIAA.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah you do n't really get it .
Here in the states it 's a compulsory license , meaning even if you only play unlicensed indie music which you have written consent from the artists themselves you are still required to pay sound exchange.So there goes your theory of how it hurts the RIAA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah you don't really get it.
Here in the states it's a compulsory license, meaning even if you only play unlicensed indie music which you have written consent from the artists themselves you are still required to pay sound exchange.So there goes your theory of how it hurts the RIAA.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686833</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28688947</id>
	<title>Really?</title>
	<author>deseipel</author>
	<datestamp>1247576520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>"US radio stations don't pay performers and producers for the music they play.."

Um, yes they do,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>....ASCAP?</htmltext>
<tokenext>" US radio stations do n't pay performers and producers for the music they play.. " Um , yes they do , ....ASCAP ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"US radio stations don't pay performers and producers for the music they play.."

Um, yes they do, ....ASCAP?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28695865</id>
	<title>Re:Contact your state senator!!!</title>
	<author>jason8</author>
	<datestamp>1247564280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>This is one of the primary reasons that radio stations have to say their callsigns at required intervals, so pilots can identify the station should they have some sort of insturment failure which allows them to tune in, but not know what they are tuning into.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>

That's interesting.  But when I was doing radio, the station ID was required <a href="http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/get-cfr.cgi?YEAR=current&amp;TITLE=47&amp;PART=73&amp;SECTION=1201&amp;SUBPART=&amp;TYPE=TEXT" title="gpo.gov" rel="nofollow">once an hour</a> [gpo.gov], as close to the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:00 as possible, usually within 2 minutes either way.  With that kind of timing, I don't see how it would be much good for a pilot in distress, unless the distress conveniently started around<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:55 or so.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is one of the primary reasons that radio stations have to say their callsigns at required intervals , so pilots can identify the station should they have some sort of insturment failure which allows them to tune in , but not know what they are tuning into .
That 's interesting .
But when I was doing radio , the station ID was required once an hour [ gpo.gov ] , as close to the : 00 as possible , usually within 2 minutes either way .
With that kind of timing , I do n't see how it would be much good for a pilot in distress , unless the distress conveniently started around : 55 or so .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is one of the primary reasons that radio stations have to say their callsigns at required intervals, so pilots can identify the station should they have some sort of insturment failure which allows them to tune in, but not know what they are tuning into.
That's interesting.
But when I was doing radio, the station ID was required once an hour [gpo.gov], as close to the :00 as possible, usually within 2 minutes either way.
With that kind of timing, I don't see how it would be much good for a pilot in distress, unless the distress conveniently started around :55 or so.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687039</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28691319</id>
	<title>Good for the arts!</title>
	<author>fugue</author>
	<datestamp>1247587620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Since Pandora plays music based on user recommendations and a presumably good (and improving) similarity metric rather than advertising, this should work out well for the arts.  Private labels and performers are just as likely to be played as the Evil Empire's stuff.  Indeed, Pandora can drop the big players anytime their contract becomes onerous, as the music genome will have good coverage of the popular genres.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Since Pandora plays music based on user recommendations and a presumably good ( and improving ) similarity metric rather than advertising , this should work out well for the arts .
Private labels and performers are just as likely to be played as the Evil Empire 's stuff .
Indeed , Pandora can drop the big players anytime their contract becomes onerous , as the music genome will have good coverage of the popular genres .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since Pandora plays music based on user recommendations and a presumably good (and improving) similarity metric rather than advertising, this should work out well for the arts.
Private labels and performers are just as likely to be played as the Evil Empire's stuff.
Indeed, Pandora can drop the big players anytime their contract becomes onerous, as the music genome will have good coverage of the popular genres.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686555</id>
	<title>I'm all for it</title>
	<author>gringofrijolero</author>
	<datestamp>1247506080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And if you hear someone humming a song, turn them in to the ASPCA ASAP</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And if you hear someone humming a song , turn them in to the ASPCA ASAP</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And if you hear someone humming a song, turn them in to the ASPCA ASAP</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28698591</id>
	<title>Re: People still listen to music radio?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247579400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I thought that went the way of the dodo. You can't get FM on the iPod,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></div></blockquote><p>There <b>ARE</b> other MP3 players than Apple's, and some of them <b>ARE</b> including FM radios.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I thought that went the way of the dodo .
You ca n't get FM on the iPod , ...There ARE other MP3 players than Apple 's , and some of them ARE including FM radios .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I thought that went the way of the dodo.
You can't get FM on the iPod, ...There ARE other MP3 players than Apple's, and some of them ARE including FM radios.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687127</id>
	<title>Fr1st 5top</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247512560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So that you don't Whatever path is It just 0wnz.', exploited that. A [4mazingkrTeskin.com] and the bottom poor priorities,</htmltext>
<tokenext>So that you do n't Whatever path is It just 0wnz .
' , exploited that .
A [ 4mazingkrTeskin.com ] and the bottom poor priorities,</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So that you don't Whatever path is It just 0wnz.
', exploited that.
A [4mazingkrTeskin.com] and the bottom poor priorities,</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28689545</id>
	<title>Re:New Model - Bill everyone</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247579760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was looking for Bill Gates in there someplace, but I didn't see it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was looking for Bill Gates in there someplace , but I did n't see it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was looking for Bill Gates in there someplace, but I didn't see it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686655</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28689235</id>
	<title>Re:All For It</title>
	<author>Locklin</author>
	<datestamp>1247578380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>SoundExchange collects royalties for ALL music -including independent music. Of course, no artist ever sees a dime of it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>SoundExchange collects royalties for ALL music -including independent music .
Of course , no artist ever sees a dime of it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>SoundExchange collects royalties for ALL music -including independent music.
Of course, no artist ever sees a dime of it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686833</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28691435</id>
	<title>Re:Contact your state senator!!!</title>
	<author>CompMD</author>
	<datestamp>1247588100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was flying across southwestern Ohio in a Piper Saratoga and knew there was going to be a good baseball game on that night.  The AM radio in the airplane had some trouble picking up WGN, so we switched over to the ADF and tuned it to 720kHz.  We got the Cubs game nice and clear, and the ADF needle was pointing towards Chicago.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was flying across southwestern Ohio in a Piper Saratoga and knew there was going to be a good baseball game on that night .
The AM radio in the airplane had some trouble picking up WGN , so we switched over to the ADF and tuned it to 720kHz .
We got the Cubs game nice and clear , and the ADF needle was pointing towards Chicago .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was flying across southwestern Ohio in a Piper Saratoga and knew there was going to be a good baseball game on that night.
The AM radio in the airplane had some trouble picking up WGN, so we switched over to the ADF and tuned it to 720kHz.
We got the Cubs game nice and clear, and the ADF needle was pointing towards Chicago.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687039</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687089</id>
	<title>so let's get this straight</title>
	<author>edalytical</author>
	<datestamp>1247512080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>MTV doesn't play music. Radio stations will stop playing music now too. Services like last.fm and Pandora only suggest music you already know about anyway. Live music sounds like crap (hey mr. indy band ever heard of an eq?). And I don't even care, because the industry quit making music long ago, it's just taken awhile for everyone to catch up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>MTV does n't play music .
Radio stations will stop playing music now too .
Services like last.fm and Pandora only suggest music you already know about anyway .
Live music sounds like crap ( hey mr. indy band ever heard of an eq ? ) .
And I do n't even care , because the industry quit making music long ago , it 's just taken awhile for everyone to catch up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>MTV doesn't play music.
Radio stations will stop playing music now too.
Services like last.fm and Pandora only suggest music you already know about anyway.
Live music sounds like crap (hey mr. indy band ever heard of an eq?).
And I don't even care, because the industry quit making music long ago, it's just taken awhile for everyone to catch up.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28688311</id>
	<title>Please.</title>
	<author>Intrinsic</author>
	<datestamp>1247569440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>With its own future secure for the next few years, Pandora is now turning its attention to the public performance debate here in the US, saying that the issue is a simple matter of fairness: why should webcasters have to pay more for music than traditional radio does?</p></div></blockquote><p>I have an answer for you. Because you decided that you wanted to give in to the record labels and screw the small broadcasters in the process and now you you want other radio stations to feel your pain? Its not about fair, its about your inability to see past the record labels bullshit.<br>Radio and Internet play is free advertising for the record labels why they hell should they have to pay? the system has worked for years, now all of a sudden they want to get even more greedy? The Record Labels days are numbered.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>With its own future secure for the next few years , Pandora is now turning its attention to the public performance debate here in the US , saying that the issue is a simple matter of fairness : why should webcasters have to pay more for music than traditional radio does ? I have an answer for you .
Because you decided that you wanted to give in to the record labels and screw the small broadcasters in the process and now you you want other radio stations to feel your pain ?
Its not about fair , its about your inability to see past the record labels bullshit.Radio and Internet play is free advertising for the record labels why they hell should they have to pay ?
the system has worked for years , now all of a sudden they want to get even more greedy ?
The Record Labels days are numbered .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With its own future secure for the next few years, Pandora is now turning its attention to the public performance debate here in the US, saying that the issue is a simple matter of fairness: why should webcasters have to pay more for music than traditional radio does?I have an answer for you.
Because you decided that you wanted to give in to the record labels and screw the small broadcasters in the process and now you you want other radio stations to feel your pain?
Its not about fair, its about your inability to see past the record labels bullshit.Radio and Internet play is free advertising for the record labels why they hell should they have to pay?
the system has worked for years, now all of a sudden they want to get even more greedy?
The Record Labels days are numbered.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28689801</id>
	<title>Let the death of radio come</title>
	<author>fudgefactor7</author>
	<datestamp>1247580780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Seriously I say this: let this bring an uttermost end to the music industry and music radio. Let their greed be their dying gasp. And when they (and the RIAA and their other-national counterparts) are dead and blowing in the breeze, the REAL meaning of music will return. That being, entertainment, enjoyment, and the performance itself. Music, like any art, was never meant to be "hey, I can get rich!" but more like "hey, look at this! I made a song! I hope you like it!" <br> <br>

Gordon Gecko was wrong, dead wrong: greed is not "good", rather it is the means to an end that is in itself wholly bad and ruinous.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously I say this : let this bring an uttermost end to the music industry and music radio .
Let their greed be their dying gasp .
And when they ( and the RIAA and their other-national counterparts ) are dead and blowing in the breeze , the REAL meaning of music will return .
That being , entertainment , enjoyment , and the performance itself .
Music , like any art , was never meant to be " hey , I can get rich !
" but more like " hey , look at this !
I made a song !
I hope you like it !
" Gordon Gecko was wrong , dead wrong : greed is not " good " , rather it is the means to an end that is in itself wholly bad and ruinous .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously I say this: let this bring an uttermost end to the music industry and music radio.
Let their greed be their dying gasp.
And when they (and the RIAA and their other-national counterparts) are dead and blowing in the breeze, the REAL meaning of music will return.
That being, entertainment, enjoyment, and the performance itself.
Music, like any art, was never meant to be "hey, I can get rich!
" but more like "hey, look at this!
I made a song!
I hope you like it!
"  

Gordon Gecko was wrong, dead wrong: greed is not "good", rather it is the means to an end that is in itself wholly bad and ruinous.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687057</id>
	<title>Re:Greed</title>
	<author>shentino</author>
	<datestamp>1247511540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You mean like Wells Fargo?</htmltext>
<tokenext>You mean like Wells Fargo ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You mean like Wells Fargo?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686381</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28690793</id>
	<title>Re:All For It</title>
	<author>deanlandolt</author>
	<datestamp>1247585220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The RIAA giving radio a compelling reason to play independent artists is exactly what we need. They can only hurt themselves.</p></div><p>Sadly, this is incorrect. Via the SoundExchange FAQ (by way of Wikipedia because those idiots have a broken Flashtastic site): <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SoundExchange" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SoundExchange</a> [wikipedia.org] </p><p>"SoundExchange collects and distributes royalties for all artists and copyright owners covered under the statutory licenses; these parties do not need to be members of SoundExchange for royalties to be collected on their behalf and distributed to them."</p><p>Yes, SoundExchange has the mandate to collect royalties for indie artists as well. And good luck getting them to pay out -- they'll no doubt have trouble "finding" you. I'm not sure what that implies it also applies to songs released under CC or similarly permissive licenses -- while the CC license specifically addresses the performance right, I wouldn't be surprised if SoundExchange still claims a statutory right to collect.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The RIAA giving radio a compelling reason to play independent artists is exactly what we need .
They can only hurt themselves.Sadly , this is incorrect .
Via the SoundExchange FAQ ( by way of Wikipedia because those idiots have a broken Flashtastic site ) : http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SoundExchange [ wikipedia.org ] " SoundExchange collects and distributes royalties for all artists and copyright owners covered under the statutory licenses ; these parties do not need to be members of SoundExchange for royalties to be collected on their behalf and distributed to them .
" Yes , SoundExchange has the mandate to collect royalties for indie artists as well .
And good luck getting them to pay out -- they 'll no doubt have trouble " finding " you .
I 'm not sure what that implies it also applies to songs released under CC or similarly permissive licenses -- while the CC license specifically addresses the performance right , I would n't be surprised if SoundExchange still claims a statutory right to collect .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The RIAA giving radio a compelling reason to play independent artists is exactly what we need.
They can only hurt themselves.Sadly, this is incorrect.
Via the SoundExchange FAQ (by way of Wikipedia because those idiots have a broken Flashtastic site): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SoundExchange [wikipedia.org] "SoundExchange collects and distributes royalties for all artists and copyright owners covered under the statutory licenses; these parties do not need to be members of SoundExchange for royalties to be collected on their behalf and distributed to them.
"Yes, SoundExchange has the mandate to collect royalties for indie artists as well.
And good luck getting them to pay out -- they'll no doubt have trouble "finding" you.
I'm not sure what that implies it also applies to songs released under CC or similarly permissive licenses -- while the CC license specifically addresses the performance right, I wouldn't be surprised if SoundExchange still claims a statutory right to collect.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686833</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687205</id>
	<title>Music is a Business. Let's Negotiate.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247513640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If the recording industry wants the public to pay it more money for being good at making contracts with musicians, okay. In exchange let's repeal the Bono Act of 1998. This law not lengthened new music copyrights to 95 years, it placed every audio recording made before 1972 under copyright until 2067. Thousands of older works were re-copyrighted even though they had already been in the public domain for many years. If this law were repealed, historical works such as wax cylinder recordings made by Thomas Edison in the 1890s, which are now protected until 2067, would again be available for public use as they should be. I don't think this is too big a concession in return for creating a brand new revenue source for the industry.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If the recording industry wants the public to pay it more money for being good at making contracts with musicians , okay .
In exchange let 's repeal the Bono Act of 1998 .
This law not lengthened new music copyrights to 95 years , it placed every audio recording made before 1972 under copyright until 2067 .
Thousands of older works were re-copyrighted even though they had already been in the public domain for many years .
If this law were repealed , historical works such as wax cylinder recordings made by Thomas Edison in the 1890s , which are now protected until 2067 , would again be available for public use as they should be .
I do n't think this is too big a concession in return for creating a brand new revenue source for the industry .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the recording industry wants the public to pay it more money for being good at making contracts with musicians, okay.
In exchange let's repeal the Bono Act of 1998.
This law not lengthened new music copyrights to 95 years, it placed every audio recording made before 1972 under copyright until 2067.
Thousands of older works were re-copyrighted even though they had already been in the public domain for many years.
If this law were repealed, historical works such as wax cylinder recordings made by Thomas Edison in the 1890s, which are now protected until 2067, would again be available for public use as they should be.
I don't think this is too big a concession in return for creating a brand new revenue source for the industry.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687119</id>
	<title>NAB deserves to lose this round</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247512440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>NAB spent the last several years arguing that satellite radio should be forced to pay these royalties.  Prior to those hearings, satellite hadn't been paying, since they were arguing that they were another form of radio.  Any lawyer worth their salt would have told NAB to support satellite radio as protection against something like this.  But they didn't.  They saw a chance to eliminate a competitor, and hoped to saddle them with an additional expense.<br>
<br>
One of the first victims of their stupidity were the NAB member stations that were streaming on the Internet.  Previously, they hadn't had to pay, either - which was a good thing for them, considering that most streams had their advertising removed from the stream, and weren't generally profitable on their own.<br>
<br>
Their arguments as to why they shouldn't have to pay are outdated.  They claim that they're giving free promotion to music, but how many terrestrial stations are actually giving exposure to new music?  Seriously - how many stations in your town are currently recycling everyone's favorite hits from the 60s, 70s, 80s, and 90s?  Radio knows that new music doesn't draw listeners - it's easier to take the free ride and give audiences the music they already know and love.<br>
<br>
Radio should have to pay.  Given NAB's size, it shouldn't be difficult to negotiate with SoundExchange for a lower rate.</htmltext>
<tokenext>NAB spent the last several years arguing that satellite radio should be forced to pay these royalties .
Prior to those hearings , satellite had n't been paying , since they were arguing that they were another form of radio .
Any lawyer worth their salt would have told NAB to support satellite radio as protection against something like this .
But they did n't .
They saw a chance to eliminate a competitor , and hoped to saddle them with an additional expense .
One of the first victims of their stupidity were the NAB member stations that were streaming on the Internet .
Previously , they had n't had to pay , either - which was a good thing for them , considering that most streams had their advertising removed from the stream , and were n't generally profitable on their own .
Their arguments as to why they should n't have to pay are outdated .
They claim that they 're giving free promotion to music , but how many terrestrial stations are actually giving exposure to new music ?
Seriously - how many stations in your town are currently recycling everyone 's favorite hits from the 60s , 70s , 80s , and 90s ?
Radio knows that new music does n't draw listeners - it 's easier to take the free ride and give audiences the music they already know and love .
Radio should have to pay .
Given NAB 's size , it should n't be difficult to negotiate with SoundExchange for a lower rate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NAB spent the last several years arguing that satellite radio should be forced to pay these royalties.
Prior to those hearings, satellite hadn't been paying, since they were arguing that they were another form of radio.
Any lawyer worth their salt would have told NAB to support satellite radio as protection against something like this.
But they didn't.
They saw a chance to eliminate a competitor, and hoped to saddle them with an additional expense.
One of the first victims of their stupidity were the NAB member stations that were streaming on the Internet.
Previously, they hadn't had to pay, either - which was a good thing for them, considering that most streams had their advertising removed from the stream, and weren't generally profitable on their own.
Their arguments as to why they shouldn't have to pay are outdated.
They claim that they're giving free promotion to music, but how many terrestrial stations are actually giving exposure to new music?
Seriously - how many stations in your town are currently recycling everyone's favorite hits from the 60s, 70s, 80s, and 90s?
Radio knows that new music doesn't draw listeners - it's easier to take the free ride and give audiences the music they already know and love.
Radio should have to pay.
Given NAB's size, it shouldn't be difficult to negotiate with SoundExchange for a lower rate.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686805</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28689479</id>
	<title>Re:Contact your state senator!!!</title>
	<author>bwalling</author>
	<datestamp>1247579400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Seriously. Email/write/call your state representative about this bill and tell them how this bill is severely diminish the quality of all radios out there. Urge them to vote against it!!</p></div></blockquote><p>So, you're saying that you don't care about justice or fairness, only what personally benefits you?  Spoken like a true American.  And people wonder what's wrong with this country.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously .
Email/write/call your state representative about this bill and tell them how this bill is severely diminish the quality of all radios out there .
Urge them to vote against it !
! So , you 're saying that you do n't care about justice or fairness , only what personally benefits you ?
Spoken like a true American .
And people wonder what 's wrong with this country .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously.
Email/write/call your state representative about this bill and tell them how this bill is severely diminish the quality of all radios out there.
Urge them to vote against it!
!So, you're saying that you don't care about justice or fairness, only what personally benefits you?
Spoken like a true American.
And people wonder what's wrong with this country.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686371</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687145</id>
	<title>I say we...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247512860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For real? People still pay for their music? I say we start a fund that pays outrageous fines to those few poor bastards that get sued and distribute music freely.<br>Unknowingly RIAA will create their own problems.<br>Clear lack of planning for emerging technology coupled with lower overhead will eventually erode consumer confidence in spending the money they demand.<br>Knowing their customers wants and needs should be a cornerstone of their business.</p><p>Reimbursing the RIAA with a fund fueled with with $1 per person per lifetime should suffice. Let them sue away. Senior citizens should be prorated.<br>I'm just waiting for the day when instead of ambulance chasers we have riaa hounds that follow court filings.<br>After the fallout all we will be left with is more talk radio.<br>Anyways I thought the reason the music industry pays the artists so little is for their distrobution and promotion. If they charge for that wtf would artists need them?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For real ?
People still pay for their music ?
I say we start a fund that pays outrageous fines to those few poor bastards that get sued and distribute music freely.Unknowingly RIAA will create their own problems.Clear lack of planning for emerging technology coupled with lower overhead will eventually erode consumer confidence in spending the money they demand.Knowing their customers wants and needs should be a cornerstone of their business.Reimbursing the RIAA with a fund fueled with with $ 1 per person per lifetime should suffice .
Let them sue away .
Senior citizens should be prorated.I 'm just waiting for the day when instead of ambulance chasers we have riaa hounds that follow court filings.After the fallout all we will be left with is more talk radio.Anyways I thought the reason the music industry pays the artists so little is for their distrobution and promotion .
If they charge for that wtf would artists need them ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For real?
People still pay for their music?
I say we start a fund that pays outrageous fines to those few poor bastards that get sued and distribute music freely.Unknowingly RIAA will create their own problems.Clear lack of planning for emerging technology coupled with lower overhead will eventually erode consumer confidence in spending the money they demand.Knowing their customers wants and needs should be a cornerstone of their business.Reimbursing the RIAA with a fund fueled with with $1 per person per lifetime should suffice.
Let them sue away.
Senior citizens should be prorated.I'm just waiting for the day when instead of ambulance chasers we have riaa hounds that follow court filings.After the fallout all we will be left with is more talk radio.Anyways I thought the reason the music industry pays the artists so little is for their distrobution and promotion.
If they charge for that wtf would artists need them?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687181</id>
	<title>Death to the Sound Thieves!</title>
	<author>malevolentjelly</author>
	<datestamp>1247513400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think what they've found here is right. The Radio Format has been getting a free ride and so have all those brigands listening to it in their cars. All the people in the world are a bunch of no-good sound thieves, Hell, they even have large fleshy scoops on the side of their heads just sucking up and stealing all the free sounds they can get close to. If only we could have those things permanently blocked so the only sounds that come through them are properly paid and licensed by the source.</p><p>I should start going to sleep at night with earmuffs on so some ghetto-blasting kid in a donk doesn't come cruising down the street blasting hip-hop and turning me into a music pirate. Then I'd have no choice but to turn myself in for participating in an illegal public listening of a song I didn't pay for.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think what they 've found here is right .
The Radio Format has been getting a free ride and so have all those brigands listening to it in their cars .
All the people in the world are a bunch of no-good sound thieves , Hell , they even have large fleshy scoops on the side of their heads just sucking up and stealing all the free sounds they can get close to .
If only we could have those things permanently blocked so the only sounds that come through them are properly paid and licensed by the source.I should start going to sleep at night with earmuffs on so some ghetto-blasting kid in a donk does n't come cruising down the street blasting hip-hop and turning me into a music pirate .
Then I 'd have no choice but to turn myself in for participating in an illegal public listening of a song I did n't pay for .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think what they've found here is right.
The Radio Format has been getting a free ride and so have all those brigands listening to it in their cars.
All the people in the world are a bunch of no-good sound thieves, Hell, they even have large fleshy scoops on the side of their heads just sucking up and stealing all the free sounds they can get close to.
If only we could have those things permanently blocked so the only sounds that come through them are properly paid and licensed by the source.I should start going to sleep at night with earmuffs on so some ghetto-blasting kid in a donk doesn't come cruising down the street blasting hip-hop and turning me into a music pirate.
Then I'd have no choice but to turn myself in for participating in an illegal public listening of a song I didn't pay for.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686805</id>
	<title>Radio Stations are already fighting this.</title>
	<author>Technician</author>
	<datestamp>1247508180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One of the radio stations I depend on for traffic reports is already fighting this.  They run several advertisements predicting the free music you listen to is at risk of being eliminated by congress with new fees on the music they play.  Call your congressman right away to stop this legislation that will end free music on radio.</p><p>The NAB, National Association of Broadcasters is leading the charge to oppose the bill.<br><a href="http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-ct-radio3-2009jul03,0,6937549.story/" title="latimes.com">http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-ct-radio3-2009jul03,0,6937549.story/</a> [latimes.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One of the radio stations I depend on for traffic reports is already fighting this .
They run several advertisements predicting the free music you listen to is at risk of being eliminated by congress with new fees on the music they play .
Call your congressman right away to stop this legislation that will end free music on radio.The NAB , National Association of Broadcasters is leading the charge to oppose the bill.http : //www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-ct-radio3-2009jul03,0,6937549.story/ [ latimes.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One of the radio stations I depend on for traffic reports is already fighting this.
They run several advertisements predicting the free music you listen to is at risk of being eliminated by congress with new fees on the music they play.
Call your congressman right away to stop this legislation that will end free music on radio.The NAB, National Association of Broadcasters is leading the charge to oppose the bill.http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-ct-radio3-2009jul03,0,6937549.story/ [latimes.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686399</id>
	<title>Why Internet radio should pay more</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247504880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Internet radio has a potential audience that spans the globe. Radio stations are typically limited by geography and signal power.</p><p>Why should passengers flying from New York to Tokyo pay more than flying from Seattle to Portland? Because the distance is longer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Internet radio has a potential audience that spans the globe .
Radio stations are typically limited by geography and signal power.Why should passengers flying from New York to Tokyo pay more than flying from Seattle to Portland ?
Because the distance is longer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Internet radio has a potential audience that spans the globe.
Radio stations are typically limited by geography and signal power.Why should passengers flying from New York to Tokyo pay more than flying from Seattle to Portland?
Because the distance is longer.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28691565</id>
	<title>Re:When i was younger</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247588700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>They paid radio to play your song, so people would actually hear it and buy it...</p></div><p>Yes, that would be called payola, and it is illegal.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>They paid radio to play your song , so people would actually hear it and buy it...Yes , that would be called payola , and it is illegal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They paid radio to play your song, so people would actually hear it and buy it...Yes, that would be called payola, and it is illegal.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686531</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28690235</id>
	<title>Re:Contact your state senator!!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247582700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Last time I was flying, the ADF radio in the (admittedly old, but perfectly legal) aircraft could only tune AM stations as well as dedicated ADF transmitters (and there's a fairly useful one at 2nm final to runway 26 at my local airfield). FM or AM audio broadcasters cannot duplicate the properties of a VOR without rather complicated antenna equipment (which is used to determine bearing from the VOR by phase change).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Last time I was flying , the ADF radio in the ( admittedly old , but perfectly legal ) aircraft could only tune AM stations as well as dedicated ADF transmitters ( and there 's a fairly useful one at 2nm final to runway 26 at my local airfield ) .
FM or AM audio broadcasters can not duplicate the properties of a VOR without rather complicated antenna equipment ( which is used to determine bearing from the VOR by phase change ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Last time I was flying, the ADF radio in the (admittedly old, but perfectly legal) aircraft could only tune AM stations as well as dedicated ADF transmitters (and there's a fairly useful one at 2nm final to runway 26 at my local airfield).
FM or AM audio broadcasters cannot duplicate the properties of a VOR without rather complicated antenna equipment (which is used to determine bearing from the VOR by phase change).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687039</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28693103</id>
	<title>Re:Contact your state senator!!!</title>
	<author>frosty\_tsm</author>
	<datestamp>1247595000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>We can always do what we see in other industries: exemptions for smaller entities.  The question is, how small.  Will it just be college radio, or will independent stations be exempt or pay less?</htmltext>
<tokenext>We can always do what we see in other industries : exemptions for smaller entities .
The question is , how small .
Will it just be college radio , or will independent stations be exempt or pay less ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We can always do what we see in other industries: exemptions for smaller entities.
The question is, how small.
Will it just be college radio, or will independent stations be exempt or pay less?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686789</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28701213</id>
	<title>Re:Reverse Payola?</title>
	<author>bhiestand</author>
	<datestamp>1247652900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Only a few months ago, it was charged in the US Congress that record companies have been paying radio stations (again, like in the fifties) to play their records.</p><p>Now they want the stations to pay them?</p><p>Playing a recording on the air is better than advertising it, and the record companies know it.</p><p>This effort is bound to fail, if not ignite laughter.</p></div><p>Actually, it's quite logical.  Instead of paying the stations to play their crappy music, they can get the stations to pay them for the right to play ANYONE'S music.  Even if it's not their music.  This way, they collect no matter what.  It's brilliant.</p><p>Even better, Pandora's role in this lobbying effort, directly attacking radio stations, ensures that they're involved in this fight.  If the radio stations manage to convince congresscritters that it's not OK to do this, it could swing the same way for internet radio.  Either that, or it'll level the playing field a bit.</p><p>Nice nick, btw.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Only a few months ago , it was charged in the US Congress that record companies have been paying radio stations ( again , like in the fifties ) to play their records.Now they want the stations to pay them ? Playing a recording on the air is better than advertising it , and the record companies know it.This effort is bound to fail , if not ignite laughter.Actually , it 's quite logical .
Instead of paying the stations to play their crappy music , they can get the stations to pay them for the right to play ANYONE 'S music .
Even if it 's not their music .
This way , they collect no matter what .
It 's brilliant.Even better , Pandora 's role in this lobbying effort , directly attacking radio stations , ensures that they 're involved in this fight .
If the radio stations manage to convince congresscritters that it 's not OK to do this , it could swing the same way for internet radio .
Either that , or it 'll level the playing field a bit.Nice nick , btw .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Only a few months ago, it was charged in the US Congress that record companies have been paying radio stations (again, like in the fifties) to play their records.Now they want the stations to pay them?Playing a recording on the air is better than advertising it, and the record companies know it.This effort is bound to fail, if not ignite laughter.Actually, it's quite logical.
Instead of paying the stations to play their crappy music, they can get the stations to pay them for the right to play ANYONE'S music.
Even if it's not their music.
This way, they collect no matter what.
It's brilliant.Even better, Pandora's role in this lobbying effort, directly attacking radio stations, ensures that they're involved in this fight.
If the radio stations manage to convince congresscritters that it's not OK to do this, it could swing the same way for internet radio.
Either that, or it'll level the playing field a bit.Nice nick, btw.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686841</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686375</id>
	<title>Two different beasts</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247504760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The internet provides all sorts of dynamics in the music being played. Radio has "Phone in a request" once in a blue moon. This would literally kill music radio, as radio stations don't have a direct way to charge the listeners. Something tells me this is simply Pandora having a hissy fit over having to pay.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The internet provides all sorts of dynamics in the music being played .
Radio has " Phone in a request " once in a blue moon .
This would literally kill music radio , as radio stations do n't have a direct way to charge the listeners .
Something tells me this is simply Pandora having a hissy fit over having to pay .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The internet provides all sorts of dynamics in the music being played.
Radio has "Phone in a request" once in a blue moon.
This would literally kill music radio, as radio stations don't have a direct way to charge the listeners.
Something tells me this is simply Pandora having a hissy fit over having to pay.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686389</id>
	<title>Awesome!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247504820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If the price of playing a song goes up we'll probably get to listen to even more blathering for the DJs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If the price of playing a song goes up we 'll probably get to listen to even more blathering for the DJs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the price of playing a song goes up we'll probably get to listen to even more blathering for the DJs.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28692413</id>
	<title>Re:Why Internet radio should pay more</title>
	<author>Xebikr</author>
	<datestamp>1247592120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Nice.  I think this is your worst analogy yet!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nice .
I think this is your worst analogy yet !
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nice.
I think this is your worst analogy yet!
:)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686399</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686693</id>
	<title>Re:People still listen to music radio?</title>
	<author>tepples</author>
	<datestamp>1247507280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You can't get FM on the iPod, and who doesn't have a CD player or mp3 jack in their car?</p></div><p>Not one of the cars that I regularly ride in has a 3.5mm stereo audio input; they're all either older or low-end. They might have tape or CD, but for a playlist longer than 80 minutes or so, the only sort of "mp3 jack" that works in every car is an FM transmitter on an unused frequency.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You ca n't get FM on the iPod , and who does n't have a CD player or mp3 jack in their car ? Not one of the cars that I regularly ride in has a 3.5mm stereo audio input ; they 're all either older or low-end .
They might have tape or CD , but for a playlist longer than 80 minutes or so , the only sort of " mp3 jack " that works in every car is an FM transmitter on an unused frequency .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can't get FM on the iPod, and who doesn't have a CD player or mp3 jack in their car?Not one of the cars that I regularly ride in has a 3.5mm stereo audio input; they're all either older or low-end.
They might have tape or CD, but for a playlist longer than 80 minutes or so, the only sort of "mp3 jack" that works in every car is an FM transmitter on an unused frequency.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686557</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28692381</id>
	<title>Re:Subterfuge</title>
	<author>Ilgaz</author>
	<datestamp>1247592060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think they found the magic. Open source SDK, use open source OS and software, have a nice friendly blog with your friendly looking (b)millionaire developer and there you have community support against evil big companies. They somehow act like they are little guy and people fall for it.</p><p>Hell you can't exist without being a big company or doing dirty tricks. Who will pay for terabytes of data, infrastructure, staff, code?</p><p>Don't misunderstand, I don't hate them or last.fm which I pay 3 dollars a month to have their fake radio which is actually a jukebox based on my tastes. I just hate this "we are nice guys, now support us, you cool friend" junk fashion which was started by Google.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think they found the magic .
Open source SDK , use open source OS and software , have a nice friendly blog with your friendly looking ( b ) millionaire developer and there you have community support against evil big companies .
They somehow act like they are little guy and people fall for it.Hell you ca n't exist without being a big company or doing dirty tricks .
Who will pay for terabytes of data , infrastructure , staff , code ? Do n't misunderstand , I do n't hate them or last.fm which I pay 3 dollars a month to have their fake radio which is actually a jukebox based on my tastes .
I just hate this " we are nice guys , now support us , you cool friend " junk fashion which was started by Google .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think they found the magic.
Open source SDK, use open source OS and software, have a nice friendly blog with your friendly looking (b)millionaire developer and there you have community support against evil big companies.
They somehow act like they are little guy and people fall for it.Hell you can't exist without being a big company or doing dirty tricks.
Who will pay for terabytes of data, infrastructure, staff, code?Don't misunderstand, I don't hate them or last.fm which I pay 3 dollars a month to have their fake radio which is actually a jukebox based on my tastes.
I just hate this "we are nice guys, now support us, you cool friend" junk fashion which was started by Google.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687233</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28688533</id>
	<title>Re:New Model - Bill everyone</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247571900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Bill Microsoft and Al Gore for bringing the internet.</p></div><p>Bill Gates</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Bill Microsoft and Al Gore for bringing the internet.Bill Gates</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bill Microsoft and Al Gore for bringing the internet.Bill Gates
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686655</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28701249</id>
	<title>Re:Obvious to anyone other than me?</title>
	<author>bhiestand</author>
	<datestamp>1247653320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I think it's pretty obvious what Pandora is angling at here, they're attacking the obvious double-standard. <b>Problem is that if it goes the other way, then that's pretty much the last nail in the coffin of broadcast radio</b>; it's already only a marginally profitable business to be in anymore, and having to pay more royalties will kill most of them off for good.</p></div><p>(emphasis mine)</p><p>I fail to see how that's a problem for Pandora.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think it 's pretty obvious what Pandora is angling at here , they 're attacking the obvious double-standard .
Problem is that if it goes the other way , then that 's pretty much the last nail in the coffin of broadcast radio ; it 's already only a marginally profitable business to be in anymore , and having to pay more royalties will kill most of them off for good .
( emphasis mine ) I fail to see how that 's a problem for Pandora .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think it's pretty obvious what Pandora is angling at here, they're attacking the obvious double-standard.
Problem is that if it goes the other way, then that's pretty much the last nail in the coffin of broadcast radio; it's already only a marginally profitable business to be in anymore, and having to pay more royalties will kill most of them off for good.
(emphasis mine)I fail to see how that's a problem for Pandora.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687085</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28688939</id>
	<title>Niche music!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247576400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Stop listening to music that only radio will play, really dig about on the internet and get into niche music. Being a huge thrash, death and black metal fan, there's bugger-all chance of anyone ever playing anything I like, so it's not even an issue in my chosen genre. If we want to try something we have to hope the music samples are on the artists website ( where we can pay the artists directly too ), the band may be in town playing or simply buy the music from a niche music store, hoping it will be OK.</p><p>Just like the good old days during the 80's when there was no net and you had to spend more time finding good music on your own, rather than have it spoon-fed to you. Far more rewarding when you find something really great and you know you're 1 of only a few hundred or a few thousand who may have heard it, rather than one of millions of brain-dead pap-swallowers!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Stop listening to music that only radio will play , really dig about on the internet and get into niche music .
Being a huge thrash , death and black metal fan , there 's bugger-all chance of anyone ever playing anything I like , so it 's not even an issue in my chosen genre .
If we want to try something we have to hope the music samples are on the artists website ( where we can pay the artists directly too ) , the band may be in town playing or simply buy the music from a niche music store , hoping it will be OK.Just like the good old days during the 80 's when there was no net and you had to spend more time finding good music on your own , rather than have it spoon-fed to you .
Far more rewarding when you find something really great and you know you 're 1 of only a few hundred or a few thousand who may have heard it , rather than one of millions of brain-dead pap-swallowers !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Stop listening to music that only radio will play, really dig about on the internet and get into niche music.
Being a huge thrash, death and black metal fan, there's bugger-all chance of anyone ever playing anything I like, so it's not even an issue in my chosen genre.
If we want to try something we have to hope the music samples are on the artists website ( where we can pay the artists directly too ), the band may be in town playing or simply buy the music from a niche music store, hoping it will be OK.Just like the good old days during the 80's when there was no net and you had to spend more time finding good music on your own, rather than have it spoon-fed to you.
Far more rewarding when you find something really great and you know you're 1 of only a few hundred or a few thousand who may have heard it, rather than one of millions of brain-dead pap-swallowers!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28690137</id>
	<title>Re:Two different beasts</title>
	<author>russotto</author>
	<datestamp>1247582280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It wouldn't kill music radio at all.  The RIAA would take the fees from Clearchannel, and funnel them right back to them as promotional incentives or whatever.  The only thing it would kill is any attempt at independent music radio.. and that's dead anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It would n't kill music radio at all .
The RIAA would take the fees from Clearchannel , and funnel them right back to them as promotional incentives or whatever .
The only thing it would kill is any attempt at independent music radio.. and that 's dead anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It wouldn't kill music radio at all.
The RIAA would take the fees from Clearchannel, and funnel them right back to them as promotional incentives or whatever.
The only thing it would kill is any attempt at independent music radio.. and that's dead anyway.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686375</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686883</id>
	<title>Re:Contact your state senator!!!</title>
	<author>Technician</author>
	<datestamp>1247508900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just for grins, maybe the stations will raise fees to promote bands and labels to offset the new cost of doing business.  This may be a good thing to raise costs to promote the bland bands.  If you think payola to promote bands was bad before, wait until this bill passes an only payola of the highest budget plays on the radio.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just for grins , maybe the stations will raise fees to promote bands and labels to offset the new cost of doing business .
This may be a good thing to raise costs to promote the bland bands .
If you think payola to promote bands was bad before , wait until this bill passes an only payola of the highest budget plays on the radio .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just for grins, maybe the stations will raise fees to promote bands and labels to offset the new cost of doing business.
This may be a good thing to raise costs to promote the bland bands.
If you think payola to promote bands was bad before, wait until this bill passes an only payola of the highest budget plays on the radio.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686371</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686463</id>
	<title>Re:Contact your state senator!!!</title>
	<author>Zerth</author>
	<datestamp>1247505360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hell no, I'm going to tell my elected officials to vote for it.</p><p>Sure we might lose mainstream music radio, but most of them are Clearchannel anyway.  I can simulate a week of a Clearchannel station with a mini-CDR in a player set to deterministic shuffle.</p><p>On the upside, we gain a shot at lots of mobile bandwidth if the radio industry crumbles, plus we set the music &amp; radio industries at each others throats, and any outcome besides the status quo also is likely to result in a weakened music industry(now or later) or more small artists getting radioplay cause they're cheaper.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hell no , I 'm going to tell my elected officials to vote for it.Sure we might lose mainstream music radio , but most of them are Clearchannel anyway .
I can simulate a week of a Clearchannel station with a mini-CDR in a player set to deterministic shuffle.On the upside , we gain a shot at lots of mobile bandwidth if the radio industry crumbles , plus we set the music &amp; radio industries at each others throats , and any outcome besides the status quo also is likely to result in a weakened music industry ( now or later ) or more small artists getting radioplay cause they 're cheaper .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hell no, I'm going to tell my elected officials to vote for it.Sure we might lose mainstream music radio, but most of them are Clearchannel anyway.
I can simulate a week of a Clearchannel station with a mini-CDR in a player set to deterministic shuffle.On the upside, we gain a shot at lots of mobile bandwidth if the radio industry crumbles, plus we set the music &amp; radio industries at each others throats, and any outcome besides the status quo also is likely to result in a weakened music industry(now or later) or more small artists getting radioplay cause they're cheaper.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686371</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686361</id>
	<title>Death to clearchannel!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247504640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sounds fair to me...  We make internet radio pay up big bucks to play music.</p><p>And the radio stations have been getting it for free!  how dare they! (be our paid shills for crap music)</p><p>Level the playing field!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds fair to me... We make internet radio pay up big bucks to play music.And the radio stations have been getting it for free !
how dare they !
( be our paid shills for crap music ) Level the playing field !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds fair to me...  We make internet radio pay up big bucks to play music.And the radio stations have been getting it for free!
how dare they!
(be our paid shills for crap music)Level the playing field!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686439</id>
	<title>Bring it on!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247505180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The sooner that the Music Industry starts playing the "payed tier" game like certain OS manufacturers, the better. Through the power of diminishing returns, radio station budgets and a public totally aware of the bullshit that's going on, only then will we see public hanging of corporate executives. We will see them hunted down for the dogs that they are and shot down rabidly in the streets. All because of the loss of non-essential entertainment.</p><p>Hey, a fella can dream can't he?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The sooner that the Music Industry starts playing the " payed tier " game like certain OS manufacturers , the better .
Through the power of diminishing returns , radio station budgets and a public totally aware of the bullshit that 's going on , only then will we see public hanging of corporate executives .
We will see them hunted down for the dogs that they are and shot down rabidly in the streets .
All because of the loss of non-essential entertainment.Hey , a fella can dream ca n't he ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The sooner that the Music Industry starts playing the "payed tier" game like certain OS manufacturers, the better.
Through the power of diminishing returns, radio station budgets and a public totally aware of the bullshit that's going on, only then will we see public hanging of corporate executives.
We will see them hunted down for the dogs that they are and shot down rabidly in the streets.
All because of the loss of non-essential entertainment.Hey, a fella can dream can't he?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686761</id>
	<title>Re:Contact your state senator!!!</title>
	<author>baKanale</author>
	<datestamp>1247507820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Sure we might lose mainstream music radio, but most of them are Clearchannel anyway.</p></div></blockquote><p>

That might be one outcome.  Alternately, we might just lose the independent stations and be stuck with all Clear Channel.  This sort of regulation always hurts the little guys more than the big conglomerates.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sure we might lose mainstream music radio , but most of them are Clearchannel anyway .
That might be one outcome .
Alternately , we might just lose the independent stations and be stuck with all Clear Channel .
This sort of regulation always hurts the little guys more than the big conglomerates .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sure we might lose mainstream music radio, but most of them are Clearchannel anyway.
That might be one outcome.
Alternately, we might just lose the independent stations and be stuck with all Clear Channel.
This sort of regulation always hurts the little guys more than the big conglomerates.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686463</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687775</id>
	<title>Re:Subterfuge</title>
	<author>syzygie</author>
	<datestamp>1247563320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think Pandora is looking out for Pandora. That means that if Pandora has to pay performance royalties, everyone else should, too. And if no one has to pay, they'll be even more pleased. I think if someone uses an artist's music to make a profit, they should have to pay the artist.</p><p>And although I agree that the system's time has passed, I'm not sure what this "Music Industry" is that you speak of (in title case, no less), but there is a lot of ignorance out there. For the record, there is no unified music industry. There are at least two distinct parts--majors and independents, and possibly a third--independents with major distribution. (AFAIC major-owned "independents" are majors.)</p><p>Artists (and their labels) used to be happy with not making any money off of radio (and paying radio stations in some cases, e.g. the payola scandal) because of the promotional value of the medium--lots of radio play, lots of sales. But nowadays, sales returns for many artists have diminished to the point that this potential source of income has once again become attractive.</p><p>In Europe, any sort of public performances (radio, streaming, live) are subject to performance royalties paid to songwriters. (It gets a little bizarre when you get a payment from one of the royalty collection societies for your own performance of your songs (which the venue was charged for), but on the whole, the system works.) Independents have been hit the hardest by the changes in the market over the last five years (or so), but are the least likely to be registered with a royalty collection society in order to collect performance (and mechanical) royalties and so the money sits in the collection society's bank account, collecting interest until it is divided up among the members of the society according to the proportion of the market share each member represents. So even if a similar system is adopted in the US, there is no guarantee that independent artists (i.e. the ones *I* care about) will get their money unless the collection system is also fair.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think Pandora is looking out for Pandora .
That means that if Pandora has to pay performance royalties , everyone else should , too .
And if no one has to pay , they 'll be even more pleased .
I think if someone uses an artist 's music to make a profit , they should have to pay the artist.And although I agree that the system 's time has passed , I 'm not sure what this " Music Industry " is that you speak of ( in title case , no less ) , but there is a lot of ignorance out there .
For the record , there is no unified music industry .
There are at least two distinct parts--majors and independents , and possibly a third--independents with major distribution .
( AFAIC major-owned " independents " are majors .
) Artists ( and their labels ) used to be happy with not making any money off of radio ( and paying radio stations in some cases , e.g .
the payola scandal ) because of the promotional value of the medium--lots of radio play , lots of sales .
But nowadays , sales returns for many artists have diminished to the point that this potential source of income has once again become attractive.In Europe , any sort of public performances ( radio , streaming , live ) are subject to performance royalties paid to songwriters .
( It gets a little bizarre when you get a payment from one of the royalty collection societies for your own performance of your songs ( which the venue was charged for ) , but on the whole , the system works .
) Independents have been hit the hardest by the changes in the market over the last five years ( or so ) , but are the least likely to be registered with a royalty collection society in order to collect performance ( and mechanical ) royalties and so the money sits in the collection society 's bank account , collecting interest until it is divided up among the members of the society according to the proportion of the market share each member represents .
So even if a similar system is adopted in the US , there is no guarantee that independent artists ( i.e .
the ones * I * care about ) will get their money unless the collection system is also fair .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think Pandora is looking out for Pandora.
That means that if Pandora has to pay performance royalties, everyone else should, too.
And if no one has to pay, they'll be even more pleased.
I think if someone uses an artist's music to make a profit, they should have to pay the artist.And although I agree that the system's time has passed, I'm not sure what this "Music Industry" is that you speak of (in title case, no less), but there is a lot of ignorance out there.
For the record, there is no unified music industry.
There are at least two distinct parts--majors and independents, and possibly a third--independents with major distribution.
(AFAIC major-owned "independents" are majors.
)Artists (and their labels) used to be happy with not making any money off of radio (and paying radio stations in some cases, e.g.
the payola scandal) because of the promotional value of the medium--lots of radio play, lots of sales.
But nowadays, sales returns for many artists have diminished to the point that this potential source of income has once again become attractive.In Europe, any sort of public performances (radio, streaming, live) are subject to performance royalties paid to songwriters.
(It gets a little bizarre when you get a payment from one of the royalty collection societies for your own performance of your songs (which the venue was charged for), but on the whole, the system works.
) Independents have been hit the hardest by the changes in the market over the last five years (or so), but are the least likely to be registered with a royalty collection society in order to collect performance (and mechanical) royalties and so the money sits in the collection society's bank account, collecting interest until it is divided up among the members of the society according to the proportion of the market share each member represents.
So even if a similar system is adopted in the US, there is no guarantee that independent artists (i.e.
the ones *I* care about) will get their money unless the collection system is also fair.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686509</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28690707</id>
	<title>Re:Contact your state senator!!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247584800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>...with partial equipment failures...</p></div><p>Dude, reading comprehension. Have you heard of it?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...with partial equipment failures...Dude , reading comprehension .
Have you heard of it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...with partial equipment failures...Dude, reading comprehension.
Have you heard of it?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28688957</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28688333</id>
	<title>no need for central collection agency any more...</title>
	<author>ConfusedVorlon</author>
	<datestamp>1247569560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Anyone who wanted to claim copyright on their music could register with the collection agency.</p><p>What's more - they could specify the price they wanted to charge for broadcast (within tiers for simplification).</p><p>That way radio station X could simply say, 'we won't play any track that costs more than X'. The rights holder would get to decide whether they want to charge more than X.</p><p>No more monopoly negotiations - the agency simply manages a market.</p><p>My guess is that most companies would pretty quickly list their tracks at $0 so as to maximise radio time.</p><p> That's just a guess though - the point is that it would be up to them to choose, and they would have no grounds for moaning.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Anyone who wanted to claim copyright on their music could register with the collection agency.What 's more - they could specify the price they wanted to charge for broadcast ( within tiers for simplification ) .That way radio station X could simply say , 'we wo n't play any track that costs more than X' .
The rights holder would get to decide whether they want to charge more than X.No more monopoly negotiations - the agency simply manages a market.My guess is that most companies would pretty quickly list their tracks at $ 0 so as to maximise radio time .
That 's just a guess though - the point is that it would be up to them to choose , and they would have no grounds for moaning .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Anyone who wanted to claim copyright on their music could register with the collection agency.What's more - they could specify the price they wanted to charge for broadcast (within tiers for simplification).That way radio station X could simply say, 'we won't play any track that costs more than X'.
The rights holder would get to decide whether they want to charge more than X.No more monopoly negotiations - the agency simply manages a market.My guess is that most companies would pretty quickly list their tracks at $0 so as to maximise radio time.
That's just a guess though - the point is that it would be up to them to choose, and they would have no grounds for moaning.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28692267</id>
	<title>Why record labels</title>
	<author>Demonantis</author>
	<datestamp>1247591640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I understand that record labels are the entities that distribute the media that artists create. If they aren't charging the radio station for them accessing the media then they should start. If the radio stations circumvent them then I guess they have a legitimate claim. The radio stations are using the music to procure a source of income(Ads targeting listeners).  As per performers I have no idea how they are defined and won't comment.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I understand that record labels are the entities that distribute the media that artists create .
If they are n't charging the radio station for them accessing the media then they should start .
If the radio stations circumvent them then I guess they have a legitimate claim .
The radio stations are using the music to procure a source of income ( Ads targeting listeners ) .
As per performers I have no idea how they are defined and wo n't comment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I understand that record labels are the entities that distribute the media that artists create.
If they aren't charging the radio station for them accessing the media then they should start.
If the radio stations circumvent them then I guess they have a legitimate claim.
The radio stations are using the music to procure a source of income(Ads targeting listeners).
As per performers I have no idea how they are defined and won't comment.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687297</id>
	<title>Re:Contact your state senator!!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247514720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Seriously, has anyone here ever written to their representatives and had it work properly? Usually, I send a clear letter stating my position and get a form letter saying something to the effect of "thank you for your support and we agree with you that's why" then they continue to list the very opposite of what my letter said. Not only does your representative not read the letter, their office flunkies miscount you letter as a letter of support rather than dissent.<br> <br>It seems to me that the voter matters less and less every year. I guess once they get computerized voting machines in place, with their lack of recountable ballots, the voters will be removed from the loop entirely.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously , has anyone here ever written to their representatives and had it work properly ?
Usually , I send a clear letter stating my position and get a form letter saying something to the effect of " thank you for your support and we agree with you that 's why " then they continue to list the very opposite of what my letter said .
Not only does your representative not read the letter , their office flunkies miscount you letter as a letter of support rather than dissent .
It seems to me that the voter matters less and less every year .
I guess once they get computerized voting machines in place , with their lack of recountable ballots , the voters will be removed from the loop entirely .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously, has anyone here ever written to their representatives and had it work properly?
Usually, I send a clear letter stating my position and get a form letter saying something to the effect of "thank you for your support and we agree with you that's why" then they continue to list the very opposite of what my letter said.
Not only does your representative not read the letter, their office flunkies miscount you letter as a letter of support rather than dissent.
It seems to me that the voter matters less and less every year.
I guess once they get computerized voting machines in place, with their lack of recountable ballots, the voters will be removed from the loop entirely.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686371</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28688957</id>
	<title>Re:Contact your state senator!!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247576580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Dude, GPS. Have you heard of it?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Dude , GPS .
Have you heard of it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dude, GPS.
Have you heard of it?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687039</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686341</id>
	<title>What?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247504460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why wouldn't they side with the Radio broadcasters as a way to use that as an argument to decrease their own costs. I mean, they have nothing to lose in the end.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why would n't they side with the Radio broadcasters as a way to use that as an argument to decrease their own costs .
I mean , they have nothing to lose in the end .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why wouldn't they side with the Radio broadcasters as a way to use that as an argument to decrease their own costs.
I mean, they have nothing to lose in the end.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28691167</id>
	<title>Re:Radio Stations are already fighting this.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247586900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is this the same NAB that fought to make XM and Sirius pay higher rates than terrestrial radio?  Fuck the NAB I say.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is this the same NAB that fought to make XM and Sirius pay higher rates than terrestrial radio ?
Fuck the NAB I say .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is this the same NAB that fought to make XM and Sirius pay higher rates than terrestrial radio?
Fuck the NAB I say.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686805</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686569</id>
	<title>Pandora is just being smart</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247506260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>.. since this will just get all normal radio stations on the side of Pandora - ie that radio should pay no royalties.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>.. since this will just get all normal radio stations on the side of Pandora - ie that radio should pay no royalties .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>.. since this will just get all normal radio stations on the side of Pandora - ie that radio should pay no royalties.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28702483</id>
	<title>Re:Contact your state senator!!!</title>
	<author>Ramahan</author>
	<datestamp>1247667300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So tell me where would all your friends be finding out about these new artists if everyone but the Big Boys of the Industry get shut down due to the fees? If its only the Big Boys left they'll probably do what Pandora is now and do everything they can to keep the RIAA and its ilk happy by only playing the music of the Big Four and shut out the independents.<br>

Oh! Your friends will find out on sites like Youtube you say. Well who do you think will be the next target? They'll use some excuse about there being no way to legally prove its the artists themselves posting there and that they can always get the royalty back from Soundexchange anyway if it is them posting.<br>

As too the argument that the Music Industry doesn't get anything back from the free play of music on the Radio. musicFIRST a coalition of artist who have testified before Congress asking that Radio pay the fees is also the same coalition which has petitioned the FCC over the fact Radio Stations have stopped playing the songs of Members of musicFIRST and Artists of the Big Four. Seems they want Radio to be forced to pay royalties for playing their songs and be forced to play them since not doing so hurts since the public never hears of them.
<br>
As to Independents collecting their Royalties from these collected fees. The list of Artist whom Soundexchange, the group who collects the fees, can't find in order to pay is laughable since it seems to find such "Obscure" artists as Ted Nugent and has yet to pay out over 50\% of what they;ve collected.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So tell me where would all your friends be finding out about these new artists if everyone but the Big Boys of the Industry get shut down due to the fees ?
If its only the Big Boys left they 'll probably do what Pandora is now and do everything they can to keep the RIAA and its ilk happy by only playing the music of the Big Four and shut out the independents .
Oh ! Your friends will find out on sites like Youtube you say .
Well who do you think will be the next target ?
They 'll use some excuse about there being no way to legally prove its the artists themselves posting there and that they can always get the royalty back from Soundexchange anyway if it is them posting .
As too the argument that the Music Industry does n't get anything back from the free play of music on the Radio .
musicFIRST a coalition of artist who have testified before Congress asking that Radio pay the fees is also the same coalition which has petitioned the FCC over the fact Radio Stations have stopped playing the songs of Members of musicFIRST and Artists of the Big Four .
Seems they want Radio to be forced to pay royalties for playing their songs and be forced to play them since not doing so hurts since the public never hears of them .
As to Independents collecting their Royalties from these collected fees .
The list of Artist whom Soundexchange , the group who collects the fees , ca n't find in order to pay is laughable since it seems to find such " Obscure " artists as Ted Nugent and has yet to pay out over 50 \ % of what they ; ve collected .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So tell me where would all your friends be finding out about these new artists if everyone but the Big Boys of the Industry get shut down due to the fees?
If its only the Big Boys left they'll probably do what Pandora is now and do everything they can to keep the RIAA and its ilk happy by only playing the music of the Big Four and shut out the independents.
Oh! Your friends will find out on sites like Youtube you say.
Well who do you think will be the next target?
They'll use some excuse about there being no way to legally prove its the artists themselves posting there and that they can always get the royalty back from Soundexchange anyway if it is them posting.
As too the argument that the Music Industry doesn't get anything back from the free play of music on the Radio.
musicFIRST a coalition of artist who have testified before Congress asking that Radio pay the fees is also the same coalition which has petitioned the FCC over the fact Radio Stations have stopped playing the songs of Members of musicFIRST and Artists of the Big Four.
Seems they want Radio to be forced to pay royalties for playing their songs and be forced to play them since not doing so hurts since the public never hears of them.
As to Independents collecting their Royalties from these collected fees.
The list of Artist whom Soundexchange, the group who collects the fees, can't find in order to pay is laughable since it seems to find such "Obscure" artists as Ted Nugent and has yet to pay out over 50\% of what they;ve collected.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686463</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687085</id>
	<title>Obvious to anyone other than me?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247512080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think it's pretty obvious what Pandora is angling at here, they're attacking the obvious double-standard. Problem is that if it goes the other way, then that's pretty much the last nail in the coffin of broadcast radio; it's already only a marginally profitable business to be in anymore, and having to pay more royalties will kill most of them off for good.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think it 's pretty obvious what Pandora is angling at here , they 're attacking the obvious double-standard .
Problem is that if it goes the other way , then that 's pretty much the last nail in the coffin of broadcast radio ; it 's already only a marginally profitable business to be in anymore , and having to pay more royalties will kill most of them off for good .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think it's pretty obvious what Pandora is angling at here, they're attacking the obvious double-standard.
Problem is that if it goes the other way, then that's pretty much the last nail in the coffin of broadcast radio; it's already only a marginally profitable business to be in anymore, and having to pay more royalties will kill most of them off for good.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686531</id>
	<title>When i was younger</title>
	<author>santax</author>
	<datestamp>1247506020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>They paid radio to play your song, so people would actually hear it and buy it...

As a matter of fact, with one of my current bands, we still do that. Not in money, but by calling them every day and get a live performance on the radio... It's for them great to have live music and it's great for us to have an wider audience.

A well, I must be getting old.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They paid radio to play your song , so people would actually hear it and buy it.. . As a matter of fact , with one of my current bands , we still do that .
Not in money , but by calling them every day and get a live performance on the radio... It 's for them great to have live music and it 's great for us to have an wider audience .
A well , I must be getting old .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They paid radio to play your song, so people would actually hear it and buy it...

As a matter of fact, with one of my current bands, we still do that.
Not in money, but by calling them every day and get a live performance on the radio... It's for them great to have live music and it's great for us to have an wider audience.
A well, I must be getting old.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686713</id>
	<title>Radio vs Pandora</title>
	<author>morsmortis</author>
	<datestamp>1247507400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext> How the hell did these stations survive past the 90s? Seriously? This technology should be fazed out and the frequency bands allocated to something worthwhile. Radio was going the right way in the late 80s by playing local bands and more underground music, but that changed during the 90s and any kind of underground music was gone by 2000. (unless you listened to a college AM station)  Since Pandora supports a broader range of music from Beethoven to Burzum, I hope they cause these shitty stations the pain they deserve for making my radio useless.  Even the local 80s station stopped playing 80s music and started playing coldplay.... wtf?

If I was Pandora I would try to team up with verizon and use that new wireless they are working on to compete with the radio. People who listen to music will pick Pandora; people who like to listen to short, ugly guys talk all day , will pick the radio.</htmltext>
<tokenext>How the hell did these stations survive past the 90s ?
Seriously ? This technology should be fazed out and the frequency bands allocated to something worthwhile .
Radio was going the right way in the late 80s by playing local bands and more underground music , but that changed during the 90s and any kind of underground music was gone by 2000 .
( unless you listened to a college AM station ) Since Pandora supports a broader range of music from Beethoven to Burzum , I hope they cause these shitty stations the pain they deserve for making my radio useless .
Even the local 80s station stopped playing 80s music and started playing coldplay.... wtf ? If I was Pandora I would try to team up with verizon and use that new wireless they are working on to compete with the radio .
People who listen to music will pick Pandora ; people who like to listen to short , ugly guys talk all day , will pick the radio .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> How the hell did these stations survive past the 90s?
Seriously? This technology should be fazed out and the frequency bands allocated to something worthwhile.
Radio was going the right way in the late 80s by playing local bands and more underground music, but that changed during the 90s and any kind of underground music was gone by 2000.
(unless you listened to a college AM station)  Since Pandora supports a broader range of music from Beethoven to Burzum, I hope they cause these shitty stations the pain they deserve for making my radio useless.
Even the local 80s station stopped playing 80s music and started playing coldplay.... wtf?

If I was Pandora I would try to team up with verizon and use that new wireless they are working on to compete with the radio.
People who listen to music will pick Pandora; people who like to listen to short, ugly guys talk all day , will pick the radio.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28695681</id>
	<title>Re:All For It</title>
	<author>tomthegeek</author>
	<datestamp>1247563500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I find it ironic that not too long ago payola was a serious problem, and now we have this.</p></div><p>Who said anything about payola not being a serious problem anymore? It still goes on just as much as it used to, they just got better at hiding it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I find it ironic that not too long ago payola was a serious problem , and now we have this.Who said anything about payola not being a serious problem anymore ?
It still goes on just as much as it used to , they just got better at hiding it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I find it ironic that not too long ago payola was a serious problem, and now we have this.Who said anything about payola not being a serious problem anymore?
It still goes on just as much as it used to, they just got better at hiding it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686833</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687711</id>
	<title>Re:New Model - Bill everyone</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247562540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In the Netherlands the above list would not be considered absurd at all. See the English pages of Buma-Stemra http://www.bumastemra.nl/en-US/Service/FAQ.htm</p><p>When a shop owner has the radio on in his office and suppliers come over to talk about deliveries he has to pay for the their passive listening to the music played. The same for his workers in the canteen. The same for the customers buying in the store. You would think the broadcaster then doesn't have to pay for the rights to send the music<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... you are wrong about that. When that shop owner goes for lunch to a restaurant nearby the bill will contain a small percentage of the rights the restaurant owner has to pay to Buma and Stemra for the background music you have to listen to. He isn't in his own shop then so shouldn't he get a deduction on the monthly bill?<br>The institutions must consider us as schizophrenic in the first place, they make us paranoia soon after. It is Kafkaesk in Dutch dimensions.<br>This non-governmental tax system progressively grows into other sectors too, copy fees for companies to compensate authors and publishers exist already and now the general public is facing similar legislation. Internet users should keep an ailing newspaper industry afloat. CD's, DVD's, music tape is already taxed.</p><p>Like with RIAA what actually drips down in payment to the performers, authors, photographers etc is a small percentage of the rights payed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In the Netherlands the above list would not be considered absurd at all .
See the English pages of Buma-Stemra http : //www.bumastemra.nl/en-US/Service/FAQ.htmWhen a shop owner has the radio on in his office and suppliers come over to talk about deliveries he has to pay for the their passive listening to the music played .
The same for his workers in the canteen .
The same for the customers buying in the store .
You would think the broadcaster then does n't have to pay for the rights to send the music ... you are wrong about that .
When that shop owner goes for lunch to a restaurant nearby the bill will contain a small percentage of the rights the restaurant owner has to pay to Buma and Stemra for the background music you have to listen to .
He is n't in his own shop then so should n't he get a deduction on the monthly bill ? The institutions must consider us as schizophrenic in the first place , they make us paranoia soon after .
It is Kafkaesk in Dutch dimensions.This non-governmental tax system progressively grows into other sectors too , copy fees for companies to compensate authors and publishers exist already and now the general public is facing similar legislation .
Internet users should keep an ailing newspaper industry afloat .
CD 's , DVD 's , music tape is already taxed.Like with RIAA what actually drips down in payment to the performers , authors , photographers etc is a small percentage of the rights payed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In the Netherlands the above list would not be considered absurd at all.
See the English pages of Buma-Stemra http://www.bumastemra.nl/en-US/Service/FAQ.htmWhen a shop owner has the radio on in his office and suppliers come over to talk about deliveries he has to pay for the their passive listening to the music played.
The same for his workers in the canteen.
The same for the customers buying in the store.
You would think the broadcaster then doesn't have to pay for the rights to send the music ... you are wrong about that.
When that shop owner goes for lunch to a restaurant nearby the bill will contain a small percentage of the rights the restaurant owner has to pay to Buma and Stemra for the background music you have to listen to.
He isn't in his own shop then so shouldn't he get a deduction on the monthly bill?The institutions must consider us as schizophrenic in the first place, they make us paranoia soon after.
It is Kafkaesk in Dutch dimensions.This non-governmental tax system progressively grows into other sectors too, copy fees for companies to compensate authors and publishers exist already and now the general public is facing similar legislation.
Internet users should keep an ailing newspaper industry afloat.
CD's, DVD's, music tape is already taxed.Like with RIAA what actually drips down in payment to the performers, authors, photographers etc is a small percentage of the rights payed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686655</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687007</id>
	<title>Re:People still listen to music radio?</title>
	<author>bertoelcon</author>
	<datestamp>1247510640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That would work better if I had any unused frequencies on my commute, most get bits from the station above and render a fm transmitter useless.<p>I got that good old tape adapter works like a charm.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That would work better if I had any unused frequencies on my commute , most get bits from the station above and render a fm transmitter useless.I got that good old tape adapter works like a charm .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That would work better if I had any unused frequencies on my commute, most get bits from the station above and render a fm transmitter useless.I got that good old tape adapter works like a charm.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686693</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28783611</id>
	<title>Re:Contact your state senator!!!</title>
	<author>madhatter256</author>
	<datestamp>1248285060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Have you guys even read the bill? The fact that my comment went down into a troll really shows the ignorance of this place.</p><p>There are a lot of independent radio stations out there that are not ClearChannel stations. This will in fact benefit ClearChannel as there are more of them. A lot of the small radio stations will not be able to compete and all we will have is one radio station company that will play the same 20 songs over and over again.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Have you guys even read the bill ?
The fact that my comment went down into a troll really shows the ignorance of this place.There are a lot of independent radio stations out there that are not ClearChannel stations .
This will in fact benefit ClearChannel as there are more of them .
A lot of the small radio stations will not be able to compete and all we will have is one radio station company that will play the same 20 songs over and over again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have you guys even read the bill?
The fact that my comment went down into a troll really shows the ignorance of this place.There are a lot of independent radio stations out there that are not ClearChannel stations.
This will in fact benefit ClearChannel as there are more of them.
A lot of the small radio stations will not be able to compete and all we will have is one radio station company that will play the same 20 songs over and over again.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686371</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686611</id>
	<title>advertising</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247506680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>at least the Pandora guys give you the option to buy what you're listening to on iTunes or Amazon, unlike a radio station.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>at least the Pandora guys give you the option to buy what you 're listening to on iTunes or Amazon , unlike a radio station .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>at least the Pandora guys give you the option to buy what you're listening to on iTunes or Amazon, unlike a radio station.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686525</id>
	<title>Re:Contact your state senator!!!</title>
	<author>omeomi</author>
	<datestamp>1247505900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>severely diminish the quality of all radios out there.</p></div><p>Have you actually listened to the radio? How can it get any worse? Oh no, I won't be able to hear the same eleven songs played over and over and over again with random call-ins by idiots asking for the same crappy song that got played 30 minutes ago. I don't know if this legislation will help make radio better, but I can't imagine it getting much worse than it already is.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>severely diminish the quality of all radios out there.Have you actually listened to the radio ?
How can it get any worse ?
Oh no , I wo n't be able to hear the same eleven songs played over and over and over again with random call-ins by idiots asking for the same crappy song that got played 30 minutes ago .
I do n't know if this legislation will help make radio better , but I ca n't imagine it getting much worse than it already is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>severely diminish the quality of all radios out there.Have you actually listened to the radio?
How can it get any worse?
Oh no, I won't be able to hear the same eleven songs played over and over and over again with random call-ins by idiots asking for the same crappy song that got played 30 minutes ago.
I don't know if this legislation will help make radio better, but I can't imagine it getting much worse than it already is.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686371</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28691931</id>
	<title>Re:When i was younger</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247590200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Today, people \_still\_ pay for play on the radio-but these days we call it "promotion" or "payola."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Today , people \ _still \ _ pay for play on the radio-but these days we call it " promotion " or " payola .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Today, people \_still\_ pay for play on the radio-but these days we call it "promotion" or "payola.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686531</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686539</id>
	<title>No need!</title>
	<author>cyn1c77</author>
	<datestamp>1247506080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Seriously. Email/write/call your state representative about this bill and tell them how this bill is severely diminish the quality of all radios out there. Urge them to vote against it!!</p></div><p>I'd say that the quality of radio already was severely diminished when a few corporations started buying up every channel in the country so that they could ram <i>their</i> selected artists down the public's throat by playing <i>their</i> hit songs over and over every hour.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously .
Email/write/call your state representative about this bill and tell them how this bill is severely diminish the quality of all radios out there .
Urge them to vote against it !
! I 'd say that the quality of radio already was severely diminished when a few corporations started buying up every channel in the country so that they could ram their selected artists down the public 's throat by playing their hit songs over and over every hour .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously.
Email/write/call your state representative about this bill and tell them how this bill is severely diminish the quality of all radios out there.
Urge them to vote against it!
!I'd say that the quality of radio already was severely diminished when a few corporations started buying up every channel in the country so that they could ram their selected artists down the public's throat by playing their hit songs over and over every hour.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686371</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687215</id>
	<title>Re:Radio Stations are already fighting this.</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1247513700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>NAB should have stood up for Pandora which is really just another form of broadcasting, but they didn't.  They made their bed, time to sleep in it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>NAB should have stood up for Pandora which is really just another form of broadcasting , but they did n't .
They made their bed , time to sleep in it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NAB should have stood up for Pandora which is really just another form of broadcasting, but they didn't.
They made their bed, time to sleep in it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686805</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686661</id>
	<title>This was done in Australia</title>
	<author>dbIII</author>
	<datestamp>1247507040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>This was done in Australia, and overnight the amount of Australian music broadcast dropped to close to zero.  For a couple of years the government rattled sabres threatening to cancel broadcast licences and then eventually radio stations were charged for all content and not just Australian content.  It really didn't matter if there were cases where there was no way the money charged could actually get back to the copyright holders because IT'S A SCAM.  The money claimed on behalf of the local copyright holders that theoretically could get back to them does not and is absorbed in "administrative costs" for instance huge payouts to board members of the organisation running the scam.  The British version of this is a prime example.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This was done in Australia , and overnight the amount of Australian music broadcast dropped to close to zero .
For a couple of years the government rattled sabres threatening to cancel broadcast licences and then eventually radio stations were charged for all content and not just Australian content .
It really did n't matter if there were cases where there was no way the money charged could actually get back to the copyright holders because IT 'S A SCAM .
The money claimed on behalf of the local copyright holders that theoretically could get back to them does not and is absorbed in " administrative costs " for instance huge payouts to board members of the organisation running the scam .
The British version of this is a prime example .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This was done in Australia, and overnight the amount of Australian music broadcast dropped to close to zero.
For a couple of years the government rattled sabres threatening to cancel broadcast licences and then eventually radio stations were charged for all content and not just Australian content.
It really didn't matter if there were cases where there was no way the money charged could actually get back to the copyright holders because IT'S A SCAM.
The money claimed on behalf of the local copyright holders that theoretically could get back to them does not and is absorbed in "administrative costs" for instance huge payouts to board members of the organisation running the scam.
The British version of this is a prime example.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28688243</id>
	<title>Re:Contact your state senator!!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247568600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Most "rock" stations in my area are stuck in a time warp, not playing anything new since 1997.  The only breaks to this are some Westwood One concert of some band back in the early 80s live at the Hollywood Bowl.  Perhaps, you might get a 30-60 minute slot where a DJ can play more recent music, usually 11:00 pm - midnight on a Friday or Saturday, but in general, you will be either hearing ads, or the same couple hundred songs over and over.</p><p>I don't blame multi station ownership either.  I've heard it done right.  For those around in the early 90s, Z-Rock was great.</p><p>Other genres are faring a bit better.  Country stations actually play stuff since Windows 2000 was released.  Sometimes you might get an independant station that might have some new interesting stuff on, but those are rather rare.</p><p>I see a race to the bottom in radio.  People don't care about hearing the same Aerosmith track from the 80s, and either just use an iPod radio adapter, or if they have to listen to something, it will be a talk radio station.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Most " rock " stations in my area are stuck in a time warp , not playing anything new since 1997 .
The only breaks to this are some Westwood One concert of some band back in the early 80s live at the Hollywood Bowl .
Perhaps , you might get a 30-60 minute slot where a DJ can play more recent music , usually 11 : 00 pm - midnight on a Friday or Saturday , but in general , you will be either hearing ads , or the same couple hundred songs over and over.I do n't blame multi station ownership either .
I 've heard it done right .
For those around in the early 90s , Z-Rock was great.Other genres are faring a bit better .
Country stations actually play stuff since Windows 2000 was released .
Sometimes you might get an independant station that might have some new interesting stuff on , but those are rather rare.I see a race to the bottom in radio .
People do n't care about hearing the same Aerosmith track from the 80s , and either just use an iPod radio adapter , or if they have to listen to something , it will be a talk radio station .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most "rock" stations in my area are stuck in a time warp, not playing anything new since 1997.
The only breaks to this are some Westwood One concert of some band back in the early 80s live at the Hollywood Bowl.
Perhaps, you might get a 30-60 minute slot where a DJ can play more recent music, usually 11:00 pm - midnight on a Friday or Saturday, but in general, you will be either hearing ads, or the same couple hundred songs over and over.I don't blame multi station ownership either.
I've heard it done right.
For those around in the early 90s, Z-Rock was great.Other genres are faring a bit better.
Country stations actually play stuff since Windows 2000 was released.
Sometimes you might get an independant station that might have some new interesting stuff on, but those are rather rare.I see a race to the bottom in radio.
People don't care about hearing the same Aerosmith track from the 80s, and either just use an iPod radio adapter, or if they have to listen to something, it will be a talk radio station.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686525</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28688605</id>
	<title>Re:Why Internet radio should pay more</title>
	<author>ImOnlySleeping</author>
	<datestamp>1247572680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't know what you do down there, but in Canada the cost is a percentage of advertising revenue, so the cost scale accordingly to number of listeners (assuming you get paid more for having a larger audience).</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know what you do down there , but in Canada the cost is a percentage of advertising revenue , so the cost scale accordingly to number of listeners ( assuming you get paid more for having a larger audience ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know what you do down there, but in Canada the cost is a percentage of advertising revenue, so the cost scale accordingly to number of listeners (assuming you get paid more for having a larger audience).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686399</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686601</id>
	<title>Re:Why Internet radio should pay more</title>
	<author>cyn1c77</author>
	<datestamp>1247506620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Internet radio has a potential audience that spans the globe. Radio stations are typically limited by geography and signal power.</p><p>Why should passengers flying from New York to Tokyo pay more than flying from Seattle to Portland? Because the distance is longer.</p></div><p>Your logic would make sense, except that Pandora pays for every single song played for every single listener.  So they access a larger audience and they pay disproportionally more per listener than regular radio stations.  </p><p>In your airplane example, this would be like passengers flying from NY to Tokyo on a 777 paying more than if they flew on a 737.  Same distance, same cramped seat, but you pay more because of the larger audience.  </p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Internet radio has a potential audience that spans the globe .
Radio stations are typically limited by geography and signal power.Why should passengers flying from New York to Tokyo pay more than flying from Seattle to Portland ?
Because the distance is longer.Your logic would make sense , except that Pandora pays for every single song played for every single listener .
So they access a larger audience and they pay disproportionally more per listener than regular radio stations .
In your airplane example , this would be like passengers flying from NY to Tokyo on a 777 paying more than if they flew on a 737 .
Same distance , same cramped seat , but you pay more because of the larger audience .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Internet radio has a potential audience that spans the globe.
Radio stations are typically limited by geography and signal power.Why should passengers flying from New York to Tokyo pay more than flying from Seattle to Portland?
Because the distance is longer.Your logic would make sense, except that Pandora pays for every single song played for every single listener.
So they access a larger audience and they pay disproportionally more per listener than regular radio stations.
In your airplane example, this would be like passengers flying from NY to Tokyo on a 777 paying more than if they flew on a 737.
Same distance, same cramped seat, but you pay more because of the larger audience.  
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686399</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686381</id>
	<title>Greed</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247504760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Pure greed when the industry turns in on itself to make a buck.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Pure greed when the industry turns in on itself to make a buck .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pure greed when the industry turns in on itself to make a buck.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28688709</id>
	<title>Re:New Model - Bill everyone</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247573940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Isn't that our tax plan?  The RIAA just wants the ability to determine where and when it can collect money.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't that our tax plan ?
The RIAA just wants the ability to determine where and when it can collect money .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't that our tax plan?
The RIAA just wants the ability to determine where and when it can collect money.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686655</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687709</id>
	<title>Re:New Model - Bill everyone</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247562540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I didn't t</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I did n't t</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I didn't t</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686655</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686371</id>
	<title>Contact your state senator!!!</title>
	<author>madhatter256</author>
	<datestamp>1247504760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seriously. Email/write/call your state representative about this bill and tell them how this bill is severely diminish the quality of all radios out there. Urge them to vote against it!!</p><p>It's enough that we have to pay higher taxes, but don't let them take away our free music.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously .
Email/write/call your state representative about this bill and tell them how this bill is severely diminish the quality of all radios out there .
Urge them to vote against it !
! It 's enough that we have to pay higher taxes , but do n't let them take away our free music .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously.
Email/write/call your state representative about this bill and tell them how this bill is severely diminish the quality of all radios out there.
Urge them to vote against it!
!It's enough that we have to pay higher taxes, but don't let them take away our free music.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687061</id>
	<title>An anti-RIAA-SoundExchange copyright licence</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247511600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The imminent death of Internet radio has led me to think of ways of modifying the Creative Commons share and share-alike non-commercial license. I wish to release some music I have composed, but before I do this, I would like to craft a variant of the creative commons licence under which SoundExchange, the RIAA and their legal representatives would be subject to a $10,000,000 fine if they  listen to my music, create derivative works based on it, or if they attempt enforce my rights under the copyright act.</p><p>Specifically, the license I would like should impose a crippling fine on SoundExchange in case it attempts to collect royalties on my behalf paid by services making ephemeral phonorecords or digital audio transmissions of sound recordings, or both, under the statutory licenses set forth in 17 U.S.C. 112 and 17 U.S.C. 114 or if it attempts to distribute the collected royalties to me pursuant to 17 U.S.C. 114(g)(2). The license should go beyond merely threatening the possibilityof a lawsuit--it should stipulate an RIAA-level fine against SoundExchange and its legal representatives.</p><p>If such a license could be crafted with sufficient care, and if sufficiently many musicians were to release music under this license, in time it could effectively criminalize SoundExchange, the RIAA and its lawyers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The imminent death of Internet radio has led me to think of ways of modifying the Creative Commons share and share-alike non-commercial license .
I wish to release some music I have composed , but before I do this , I would like to craft a variant of the creative commons licence under which SoundExchange , the RIAA and their legal representatives would be subject to a $ 10,000,000 fine if they listen to my music , create derivative works based on it , or if they attempt enforce my rights under the copyright act.Specifically , the license I would like should impose a crippling fine on SoundExchange in case it attempts to collect royalties on my behalf paid by services making ephemeral phonorecords or digital audio transmissions of sound recordings , or both , under the statutory licenses set forth in 17 U.S.C .
112 and 17 U.S.C .
114 or if it attempts to distribute the collected royalties to me pursuant to 17 U.S.C .
114 ( g ) ( 2 ) . The license should go beyond merely threatening the possibilityof a lawsuit--it should stipulate an RIAA-level fine against SoundExchange and its legal representatives.If such a license could be crafted with sufficient care , and if sufficiently many musicians were to release music under this license , in time it could effectively criminalize SoundExchange , the RIAA and its lawyers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The imminent death of Internet radio has led me to think of ways of modifying the Creative Commons share and share-alike non-commercial license.
I wish to release some music I have composed, but before I do this, I would like to craft a variant of the creative commons licence under which SoundExchange, the RIAA and their legal representatives would be subject to a $10,000,000 fine if they  listen to my music, create derivative works based on it, or if they attempt enforce my rights under the copyright act.Specifically, the license I would like should impose a crippling fine on SoundExchange in case it attempts to collect royalties on my behalf paid by services making ephemeral phonorecords or digital audio transmissions of sound recordings, or both, under the statutory licenses set forth in 17 U.S.C.
112 and 17 U.S.C.
114 or if it attempts to distribute the collected royalties to me pursuant to 17 U.S.C.
114(g)(2). The license should go beyond merely threatening the possibilityof a lawsuit--it should stipulate an RIAA-level fine against SoundExchange and its legal representatives.If such a license could be crafted with sufficient care, and if sufficiently many musicians were to release music under this license, in time it could effectively criminalize SoundExchange, the RIAA and its lawyers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687421</id>
	<title>Re:People still listen to music radio?</title>
	<author>feepness</author>
	<datestamp>1247602500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Not one of the cars that I regularly ride in has a 3.5mm stereo audio input; they're all either older or low-end.</p></div><p>I had the same problem on a 2003 Mazda 6 and yeah, the FM transmitters are a pain in the butt.  Not to mention you can't simply plug in a different stereo without buying a new dash panel!
<br> <br>
After far too much searching I found <a href="http://www.car-cd-changer.net/" title="car-cd-changer.net">this</a> [car-cd-changer.net] for about a hundred bucks on ebay.  Sorry to sound like an ad but I'm pretty happy with it for the price.  It mimics the CD player so it uses the existing CD changer controls while playing back off a USB stick or an SD card.  It also has an auxiliary input 3.5mm jack.  It's far from perfect (it doesn't remember where in the song you are when you leave which is fine for short songs, but I have some long continuous mixes).  But, compared to an FM transmitter it is an absolute joy.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Not one of the cars that I regularly ride in has a 3.5mm stereo audio input ; they 're all either older or low-end.I had the same problem on a 2003 Mazda 6 and yeah , the FM transmitters are a pain in the butt .
Not to mention you ca n't simply plug in a different stereo without buying a new dash panel !
After far too much searching I found this [ car-cd-changer.net ] for about a hundred bucks on ebay .
Sorry to sound like an ad but I 'm pretty happy with it for the price .
It mimics the CD player so it uses the existing CD changer controls while playing back off a USB stick or an SD card .
It also has an auxiliary input 3.5mm jack .
It 's far from perfect ( it does n't remember where in the song you are when you leave which is fine for short songs , but I have some long continuous mixes ) .
But , compared to an FM transmitter it is an absolute joy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not one of the cars that I regularly ride in has a 3.5mm stereo audio input; they're all either older or low-end.I had the same problem on a 2003 Mazda 6 and yeah, the FM transmitters are a pain in the butt.
Not to mention you can't simply plug in a different stereo without buying a new dash panel!
After far too much searching I found this [car-cd-changer.net] for about a hundred bucks on ebay.
Sorry to sound like an ad but I'm pretty happy with it for the price.
It mimics the CD player so it uses the existing CD changer controls while playing back off a USB stick or an SD card.
It also has an auxiliary input 3.5mm jack.
It's far from perfect (it doesn't remember where in the song you are when you leave which is fine for short songs, but I have some long continuous mixes).
But, compared to an FM transmitter it is an absolute joy.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686693</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28690601</id>
	<title>Re:Radio Stations are already fighting this.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247584320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If anyone should pay more, it's pandora. They're NOT an internet radio station, they're really nothing more than an ipod on shuffle, no on-air personality, no news, no opportunities for people to call in and get their voices heard.</p><p>Pandora adds absolutely zero value to the product, they derive every bit of their value from the music other people perform and they should have to pay.. a LOT.. for what they do.</p><p>It's amusing how traditional radio exagerates their ratings and average quarter hour, with this bill we'll soon see radio stations claiming more accurate figures, good for advertisers, I guess.</p><p>Radio has almost always been a troubled industry, these days, it's almost impossible for any radio station, internet or otherwise to turn a profit. (and for internet radio, forget profit, it's impossible to break even)</p><p>I've wished regular radio and internet radio would stop fighting each other and realize that we're all in the same boat. It's tough for all of us.</p><p>It's laughable the recording industry would even consider going after an industry that doesn't have any money in the first place.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If anyone should pay more , it 's pandora .
They 're NOT an internet radio station , they 're really nothing more than an ipod on shuffle , no on-air personality , no news , no opportunities for people to call in and get their voices heard.Pandora adds absolutely zero value to the product , they derive every bit of their value from the music other people perform and they should have to pay.. a LOT.. for what they do.It 's amusing how traditional radio exagerates their ratings and average quarter hour , with this bill we 'll soon see radio stations claiming more accurate figures , good for advertisers , I guess.Radio has almost always been a troubled industry , these days , it 's almost impossible for any radio station , internet or otherwise to turn a profit .
( and for internet radio , forget profit , it 's impossible to break even ) I 've wished regular radio and internet radio would stop fighting each other and realize that we 're all in the same boat .
It 's tough for all of us.It 's laughable the recording industry would even consider going after an industry that does n't have any money in the first place .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If anyone should pay more, it's pandora.
They're NOT an internet radio station, they're really nothing more than an ipod on shuffle, no on-air personality, no news, no opportunities for people to call in and get their voices heard.Pandora adds absolutely zero value to the product, they derive every bit of their value from the music other people perform and they should have to pay.. a LOT.. for what they do.It's amusing how traditional radio exagerates their ratings and average quarter hour, with this bill we'll soon see radio stations claiming more accurate figures, good for advertisers, I guess.Radio has almost always been a troubled industry, these days, it's almost impossible for any radio station, internet or otherwise to turn a profit.
(and for internet radio, forget profit, it's impossible to break even)I've wished regular radio and internet radio would stop fighting each other and realize that we're all in the same boat.
It's tough for all of us.It's laughable the recording industry would even consider going after an industry that doesn't have any money in the first place.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686805</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687039</id>
	<title>Re:Contact your state senator!!!</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1247511240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>On the upside, we gain a shot at lots of mobile bandwidth if the radio industry crumbles</p></div></blockquote><p>No, you won't.  These frequencies are also shared with all sorts of navigation equipment, that luckly enough radio stations contribute to.  Pilots regularly use standard radio stations in place of VOR transmitters for navigation.  This is one of the primary reasons that radio stations have to say their callsigns at required intervals, so pilots can identify the station should they have some sort of insturment failure which allows them to tune in, but not know what they are tuning into.  Once you figure out what you're listening to, and which direction it is, you can use just a few more landmarks or another station to figure out where the hell you are.</p><p>Very useful if you're in a small craft at night with partial equipment failures, and doing so is a requirement for getting an instrument rating for private pilots.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>On the upside , we gain a shot at lots of mobile bandwidth if the radio industry crumblesNo , you wo n't .
These frequencies are also shared with all sorts of navigation equipment , that luckly enough radio stations contribute to .
Pilots regularly use standard radio stations in place of VOR transmitters for navigation .
This is one of the primary reasons that radio stations have to say their callsigns at required intervals , so pilots can identify the station should they have some sort of insturment failure which allows them to tune in , but not know what they are tuning into .
Once you figure out what you 're listening to , and which direction it is , you can use just a few more landmarks or another station to figure out where the hell you are.Very useful if you 're in a small craft at night with partial equipment failures , and doing so is a requirement for getting an instrument rating for private pilots .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On the upside, we gain a shot at lots of mobile bandwidth if the radio industry crumblesNo, you won't.
These frequencies are also shared with all sorts of navigation equipment, that luckly enough radio stations contribute to.
Pilots regularly use standard radio stations in place of VOR transmitters for navigation.
This is one of the primary reasons that radio stations have to say their callsigns at required intervals, so pilots can identify the station should they have some sort of insturment failure which allows them to tune in, but not know what they are tuning into.
Once you figure out what you're listening to, and which direction it is, you can use just a few more landmarks or another station to figure out where the hell you are.Very useful if you're in a small craft at night with partial equipment failures, and doing so is a requirement for getting an instrument rating for private pilots.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686463</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28688081</id>
	<title>Re:What?</title>
	<author>eltaco</author>
	<datestamp>1247566620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>because it's still the fight between established and new media.</htmltext>
<tokenext>because it 's still the fight between established and new media .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>because it's still the fight between established and new media.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686341</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28690133</id>
	<title>Pandora want Solar power to pay for music</title>
	<author>kai6novice</author>
	<datestamp>1247582280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why couldn't Pandora invest on a couple of solar panel. Have the solar panel generate power, sell the electricity, and use that money to pay for the music? So we all have endless supply of free music. Problem solved.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why could n't Pandora invest on a couple of solar panel .
Have the solar panel generate power , sell the electricity , and use that money to pay for the music ?
So we all have endless supply of free music .
Problem solved .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why couldn't Pandora invest on a couple of solar panel.
Have the solar panel generate power, sell the electricity, and use that money to pay for the music?
So we all have endless supply of free music.
Problem solved.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28690519</id>
	<title>Radio was around before RIAA</title>
	<author>gubers33</author>
	<datestamp>1247583900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>RIAA is the most absurd organization around. They do realize that the radio is ancient compared to them. They seriously are looking for money out of everyone's pockets in a time when the the economy is in the tank. I mean they tried to get millions in imaginary damages from a college student. Now they are trying to get money out of an already struggling radio business which has been playing the music for free for well over 50 years.</htmltext>
<tokenext>RIAA is the most absurd organization around .
They do realize that the radio is ancient compared to them .
They seriously are looking for money out of everyone 's pockets in a time when the the economy is in the tank .
I mean they tried to get millions in imaginary damages from a college student .
Now they are trying to get money out of an already struggling radio business which has been playing the music for free for well over 50 years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>RIAA is the most absurd organization around.
They do realize that the radio is ancient compared to them.
They seriously are looking for money out of everyone's pockets in a time when the the economy is in the tank.
I mean they tried to get millions in imaginary damages from a college student.
Now they are trying to get money out of an already struggling radio business which has been playing the music for free for well over 50 years.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687233</id>
	<title>Re:Subterfuge</title>
	<author>syousef</author>
	<datestamp>1247514000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Pandora is looking after Pandora's interests. I'd barely heard of this pithy organisation before last week and now they're all over the news. Just get back in your box. We don't want or need you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Pandora is looking after Pandora 's interests .
I 'd barely heard of this pithy organisation before last week and now they 're all over the news .
Just get back in your box .
We do n't want or need you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pandora is looking after Pandora's interests.
I'd barely heard of this pithy organisation before last week and now they're all over the news.
Just get back in your box.
We don't want or need you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686509</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28691031</id>
	<title>Umm</title>
	<author>spicyed</author>
	<datestamp>1247586240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Seems to say that terrestrial radio already pays the Songwriters huh? Those are the people I want my money going to anyway..Not a record exec who is going to spend it on the next craptastic pop album.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Seems to say that terrestrial radio already pays the Songwriters huh ?
Those are the people I want my money going to anyway..Not a record exec who is going to spend it on the next craptastic pop album .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seems to say that terrestrial radio already pays the Songwriters huh?
Those are the people I want my money going to anyway..Not a record exec who is going to spend it on the next craptastic pop album.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687173</id>
	<title>If it's not pirate..</title>
	<author>msimm</author>
	<datestamp>1247513280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's not independent. Anyway, we lost most of the independent radio stations in the 90's.<br> <br>Perhaps their hope is that by playing this game they either A) effect an industry they might see as a competitor or B) they gain an ally in short term with their own fight who can help with legislation and/or rate negotiation. Kind of a reversal of what they might have seen as a divide and conquer scheme that landed them the different rates in the first place.<br> <br>Of course the real fight is still coming as we begin the transition from analog broadcasting to an all digital networked signal. After all, a cell phone is just a radio device.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not independent .
Anyway , we lost most of the independent radio stations in the 90 's .
Perhaps their hope is that by playing this game they either A ) effect an industry they might see as a competitor or B ) they gain an ally in short term with their own fight who can help with legislation and/or rate negotiation .
Kind of a reversal of what they might have seen as a divide and conquer scheme that landed them the different rates in the first place .
Of course the real fight is still coming as we begin the transition from analog broadcasting to an all digital networked signal .
After all , a cell phone is just a radio device .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not independent.
Anyway, we lost most of the independent radio stations in the 90's.
Perhaps their hope is that by playing this game they either A) effect an industry they might see as a competitor or B) they gain an ally in short term with their own fight who can help with legislation and/or rate negotiation.
Kind of a reversal of what they might have seen as a divide and conquer scheme that landed them the different rates in the first place.
Of course the real fight is still coming as we begin the transition from analog broadcasting to an all digital networked signal.
After all, a cell phone is just a radio device.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686761</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28690479</id>
	<title>Maybe it's different</title>
	<author>Nerdposeur</author>
	<datestamp>1247583720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think I'm with you, but I can see an argument that Pandora is different from a radio station. A radio station arguably promotes music sales; services that customize their playlists to your tastes might actually replace music sales. Maybe music becomes a service rather than a product in that case.</p><p>I do think it's silly that DJ-controlled stations should be charged differently simply because one broadcasts via radio and one via internet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think I 'm with you , but I can see an argument that Pandora is different from a radio station .
A radio station arguably promotes music sales ; services that customize their playlists to your tastes might actually replace music sales .
Maybe music becomes a service rather than a product in that case.I do think it 's silly that DJ-controlled stations should be charged differently simply because one broadcasts via radio and one via internet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think I'm with you, but I can see an argument that Pandora is different from a radio station.
A radio station arguably promotes music sales; services that customize their playlists to your tastes might actually replace music sales.
Maybe music becomes a service rather than a product in that case.I do think it's silly that DJ-controlled stations should be charged differently simply because one broadcasts via radio and one via internet.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686917</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28690197</id>
	<title>Re:Reverse Payola?</title>
	<author>russotto</author>
	<datestamp>1247582580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Only a few months ago, it was charged in the US Congress that record companies have been paying radio stations (again, like in the fifties) to play their records.</p></div></blockquote><p>They never stopped.  They just stopped saying they were doing so, and came up with laundering schemes so they could pretend they weren't.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Only a few months ago , it was charged in the US Congress that record companies have been paying radio stations ( again , like in the fifties ) to play their records.They never stopped .
They just stopped saying they were doing so , and came up with laundering schemes so they could pretend they were n't .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Only a few months ago, it was charged in the US Congress that record companies have been paying radio stations (again, like in the fifties) to play their records.They never stopped.
They just stopped saying they were doing so, and came up with laundering schemes so they could pretend they weren't.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686841</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687457</id>
	<title>you're brilliant music industry</title>
	<author>circletimessquare</author>
	<datestamp>1247602860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>now that everyone has abandoned traditional radio for iPods, Pandora, and last.fm for 10 years now, its perfect timing to swoop in and milk radio dry</p><p>they've waited 90 years for the perfect time to do this</p><p>and you're next satellite radio... as soon as you declare bankruptcy!</p><p>how fucking pathetic. what, ran out of grandmothers and college kids to sue?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>now that everyone has abandoned traditional radio for iPods , Pandora , and last.fm for 10 years now , its perfect timing to swoop in and milk radio drythey 've waited 90 years for the perfect time to do thisand you 're next satellite radio... as soon as you declare bankruptcy ! how fucking pathetic .
what , ran out of grandmothers and college kids to sue ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>now that everyone has abandoned traditional radio for iPods, Pandora, and last.fm for 10 years now, its perfect timing to swoop in and milk radio drythey've waited 90 years for the perfect time to do thisand you're next satellite radio... as soon as you declare bankruptcy!how fucking pathetic.
what, ran out of grandmothers and college kids to sue?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686833</id>
	<title>All For It</title>
	<author>bky1701</author>
	<datestamp>1247508420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>The RIAA giving radio a compelling reason to play independent artists is exactly what we need. They can only hurt themselves.
<br> <br>
I find it ironic that not too long ago payola was a serious problem, and now we have this. These are the death throws of the recording industry, and I think that is a great thing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The RIAA giving radio a compelling reason to play independent artists is exactly what we need .
They can only hurt themselves .
I find it ironic that not too long ago payola was a serious problem , and now we have this .
These are the death throws of the recording industry , and I think that is a great thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The RIAA giving radio a compelling reason to play independent artists is exactly what we need.
They can only hurt themselves.
I find it ironic that not too long ago payola was a serious problem, and now we have this.
These are the death throws of the recording industry, and I think that is a great thing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687019</id>
	<title>A little joy for the dance music community.</title>
	<author>ins0m</author>
	<datestamp>1247510820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Warning: I work with EDM-variety music producers.</p><p>This is actually fantastic news.  When we provide ala carte downloads for our tracks, they usually get shunned and our systems spend hours each month uploading to Rhapsody and the like... for $6 royalty statements.</p><p>The net result?</p><p>An hour block of unadvertised, "live mix" content wherein the latest music gets performed and no one pays a red cent to Harry Fox.  It works thusly:</p><p>1.  DJ in our roster wishes to promote.<br>2.  Under US tax code, any music said DJ has paid for is a business expense as an appropriation of requisite tools to perform said job.<br>3.  DJ plays promotional mix set, commercial free, and it's released to the blogs under fair use.<br>5.  Profit.  DJ sees more bookings as a result for live-performance gigs.  The hottest tracks have already been promoted to BBC Radio One and artists see more BDS numbers as a result.  People buy more hardcopies as a result of extended exposure.<br>6.  You missed there wasn't a step 4, and there is no "... Profit?" meme.</p><p>It would take a bit of renegade work, but there isn't any reason why bands can't be promoted in the same way.  It's more on the radio DJ's taking the responsibility for ownership instead of the studio for the tracks performed, but that would effectively shut down payola in most cases.  With the advent of the Internet, it means these streams can be put out royalty-free and can survive for public enjoyment, while increasing artist exposure and cutting the middleman out.   How would the site maintain itself?   Through rabid fans.  Just look at DogsOnAcid for an example.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Warning : I work with EDM-variety music producers.This is actually fantastic news .
When we provide ala carte downloads for our tracks , they usually get shunned and our systems spend hours each month uploading to Rhapsody and the like... for $ 6 royalty statements.The net result ? An hour block of unadvertised , " live mix " content wherein the latest music gets performed and no one pays a red cent to Harry Fox .
It works thusly : 1 .
DJ in our roster wishes to promote.2 .
Under US tax code , any music said DJ has paid for is a business expense as an appropriation of requisite tools to perform said job.3 .
DJ plays promotional mix set , commercial free , and it 's released to the blogs under fair use.5 .
Profit. DJ sees more bookings as a result for live-performance gigs .
The hottest tracks have already been promoted to BBC Radio One and artists see more BDS numbers as a result .
People buy more hardcopies as a result of extended exposure.6 .
You missed there was n't a step 4 , and there is no " .. .
Profit ? " meme.It would take a bit of renegade work , but there is n't any reason why bands ca n't be promoted in the same way .
It 's more on the radio DJ 's taking the responsibility for ownership instead of the studio for the tracks performed , but that would effectively shut down payola in most cases .
With the advent of the Internet , it means these streams can be put out royalty-free and can survive for public enjoyment , while increasing artist exposure and cutting the middleman out .
How would the site maintain itself ?
Through rabid fans .
Just look at DogsOnAcid for an example .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Warning: I work with EDM-variety music producers.This is actually fantastic news.
When we provide ala carte downloads for our tracks, they usually get shunned and our systems spend hours each month uploading to Rhapsody and the like... for $6 royalty statements.The net result?An hour block of unadvertised, "live mix" content wherein the latest music gets performed and no one pays a red cent to Harry Fox.
It works thusly:1.
DJ in our roster wishes to promote.2.
Under US tax code, any music said DJ has paid for is a business expense as an appropriation of requisite tools to perform said job.3.
DJ plays promotional mix set, commercial free, and it's released to the blogs under fair use.5.
Profit.  DJ sees more bookings as a result for live-performance gigs.
The hottest tracks have already been promoted to BBC Radio One and artists see more BDS numbers as a result.
People buy more hardcopies as a result of extended exposure.6.
You missed there wasn't a step 4, and there is no "...
Profit?" meme.It would take a bit of renegade work, but there isn't any reason why bands can't be promoted in the same way.
It's more on the radio DJ's taking the responsibility for ownership instead of the studio for the tracks performed, but that would effectively shut down payola in most cases.
With the advent of the Internet, it means these streams can be put out royalty-free and can survive for public enjoyment, while increasing artist exposure and cutting the middleman out.
How would the site maintain itself?
Through rabid fans.
Just look at DogsOnAcid for an example.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686545</id>
	<title>Pandora trying to move radio to their side?</title>
	<author>bukuman</author>
	<datestamp>1247506080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Perhaps Pandora hopes to have radio come to the aid of internet radio - "We'll drag you down with us if you don't step up!".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps Pandora hopes to have radio come to the aid of internet radio - " We 'll drag you down with us if you do n't step up !
" .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps Pandora hopes to have radio come to the aid of internet radio - "We'll drag you down with us if you don't step up!
".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28688627</id>
	<title>This is a very timely issue...</title>
	<author>zuki</author>
	<datestamp>1247572980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Certainly, I do not think that a single Slashdot reader was alive around 1930, which is around when US Congress enacted legislation that would make it easier for the early terrestrial radio broadcasters to invest and build out their fledging radio transmission network, by granting them an exemption from the obligation of having to pay royalties to the owners of the sound recordings they were playing on the air, although they were still obligated to pay the writers, their publishers and appointed representatives (ASCAP, BMI, Harry Fox Agency).
<br> <br>
These payments to <b>both</b> sound recording owners as well as publishers are the norm for stations everywhere else in the world.
<br> <br>
A measure of how wildly successful the radio stations are in the US today should be the amount of money they appear to have available to spend on lobbyists hired to ensure that this one-time exemption never ends.
<br> <br>
One could fail to see what is so bad for owners of sound recordings to finally get paid for the use of their work, broadcasters have had a free ride for 80 years or so, it's fairly clear that they do not need that exemption for its original purpose anymore, and they should build their business model around the same one every other radio station on earth has been using successfully all of this time.<br> <br>
Yes, it obviously fantastic to have your songs promoted on radio, and labels have always seen this as a great way to help sell many more copies of whatever physical product, downloads or ringtones even. But when comparing the amount the broadcasters would have to pay for each song played to what most of them are already racking up from pro-rated advertising income for the time slot that song was in, one cannot help but wonder what this fuss is all about.... a mere few drops in the bucket.<br> <br>

Z.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Certainly , I do not think that a single Slashdot reader was alive around 1930 , which is around when US Congress enacted legislation that would make it easier for the early terrestrial radio broadcasters to invest and build out their fledging radio transmission network , by granting them an exemption from the obligation of having to pay royalties to the owners of the sound recordings they were playing on the air , although they were still obligated to pay the writers , their publishers and appointed representatives ( ASCAP , BMI , Harry Fox Agency ) .
These payments to both sound recording owners as well as publishers are the norm for stations everywhere else in the world .
A measure of how wildly successful the radio stations are in the US today should be the amount of money they appear to have available to spend on lobbyists hired to ensure that this one-time exemption never ends .
One could fail to see what is so bad for owners of sound recordings to finally get paid for the use of their work , broadcasters have had a free ride for 80 years or so , it 's fairly clear that they do not need that exemption for its original purpose anymore , and they should build their business model around the same one every other radio station on earth has been using successfully all of this time .
Yes , it obviously fantastic to have your songs promoted on radio , and labels have always seen this as a great way to help sell many more copies of whatever physical product , downloads or ringtones even .
But when comparing the amount the broadcasters would have to pay for each song played to what most of them are already racking up from pro-rated advertising income for the time slot that song was in , one can not help but wonder what this fuss is all about.... a mere few drops in the bucket .
Z .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Certainly, I do not think that a single Slashdot reader was alive around 1930, which is around when US Congress enacted legislation that would make it easier for the early terrestrial radio broadcasters to invest and build out their fledging radio transmission network, by granting them an exemption from the obligation of having to pay royalties to the owners of the sound recordings they were playing on the air, although they were still obligated to pay the writers, their publishers and appointed representatives (ASCAP, BMI, Harry Fox Agency).
These payments to both sound recording owners as well as publishers are the norm for stations everywhere else in the world.
A measure of how wildly successful the radio stations are in the US today should be the amount of money they appear to have available to spend on lobbyists hired to ensure that this one-time exemption never ends.
One could fail to see what is so bad for owners of sound recordings to finally get paid for the use of their work, broadcasters have had a free ride for 80 years or so, it's fairly clear that they do not need that exemption for its original purpose anymore, and they should build their business model around the same one every other radio station on earth has been using successfully all of this time.
Yes, it obviously fantastic to have your songs promoted on radio, and labels have always seen this as a great way to help sell many more copies of whatever physical product, downloads or ringtones even.
But when comparing the amount the broadcasters would have to pay for each song played to what most of them are already racking up from pro-rated advertising income for the time slot that song was in, one cannot help but wonder what this fuss is all about.... a mere few drops in the bucket.
Z.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28688377</id>
	<title>Re:New Model - Bill everyone</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247570100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is a certain mind set that believes everyone else in the world is trying to make too much money. This type of criticism often arises from feelings of self contempt projected on others. Neither maximizing one's income nor minimizing one's expenses is a moral failure. Most comments here are from consumers of goods and services so they naturally espouse arguments that the provider of these items are greedy, selfish, short-sighted etc. Its hard to take these comment seriously. I suspect most commentators are just reluctant to admit that they want to obtain goods and services as cheaply as possible - preferably free.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is a certain mind set that believes everyone else in the world is trying to make too much money .
This type of criticism often arises from feelings of self contempt projected on others .
Neither maximizing one 's income nor minimizing one 's expenses is a moral failure .
Most comments here are from consumers of goods and services so they naturally espouse arguments that the provider of these items are greedy , selfish , short-sighted etc .
Its hard to take these comment seriously .
I suspect most commentators are just reluctant to admit that they want to obtain goods and services as cheaply as possible - preferably free .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is a certain mind set that believes everyone else in the world is trying to make too much money.
This type of criticism often arises from feelings of self contempt projected on others.
Neither maximizing one's income nor minimizing one's expenses is a moral failure.
Most comments here are from consumers of goods and services so they naturally espouse arguments that the provider of these items are greedy, selfish, short-sighted etc.
Its hard to take these comment seriously.
I suspect most commentators are just reluctant to admit that they want to obtain goods and services as cheaply as possible - preferably free.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686655</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28690187</id>
	<title>Re:Obvious to anyone other than me?</title>
	<author>ndavis</author>
	<datestamp>1247582520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I think it's pretty obvious what Pandora is angling at here, they're attacking the obvious double-standard. Problem is that if it goes the other way, then that's pretty much the last nail in the coffin of broadcast radio; it's already only a marginally profitable business to be in anymore, and having to pay more royalties will kill most of them off for good.</p></div><p>
Actually my wife works in radio and most of the stations are loosing money as advertising quickly dried up while being overstaffed.  This caused rampant mangement cuts and commission cuts for sales reps.  Not to mention the cutback in events which is meant to bring in more listeners.<br> <br>

Of course what I really find interesting is how broadcast radio companies like to link with companies or products that are dying such as AOL or Microsoft Zune.<br> <br>

Even with my wife working for a radio company I still hope Pandora wins just to level the playing field with Satellite Radio which I prefer.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think it 's pretty obvious what Pandora is angling at here , they 're attacking the obvious double-standard .
Problem is that if it goes the other way , then that 's pretty much the last nail in the coffin of broadcast radio ; it 's already only a marginally profitable business to be in anymore , and having to pay more royalties will kill most of them off for good .
Actually my wife works in radio and most of the stations are loosing money as advertising quickly dried up while being overstaffed .
This caused rampant mangement cuts and commission cuts for sales reps. Not to mention the cutback in events which is meant to bring in more listeners .
Of course what I really find interesting is how broadcast radio companies like to link with companies or products that are dying such as AOL or Microsoft Zune .
Even with my wife working for a radio company I still hope Pandora wins just to level the playing field with Satellite Radio which I prefer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think it's pretty obvious what Pandora is angling at here, they're attacking the obvious double-standard.
Problem is that if it goes the other way, then that's pretty much the last nail in the coffin of broadcast radio; it's already only a marginally profitable business to be in anymore, and having to pay more royalties will kill most of them off for good.
Actually my wife works in radio and most of the stations are loosing money as advertising quickly dried up while being overstaffed.
This caused rampant mangement cuts and commission cuts for sales reps.  Not to mention the cutback in events which is meant to bring in more listeners.
Of course what I really find interesting is how broadcast radio companies like to link with companies or products that are dying such as AOL or Microsoft Zune.
Even with my wife working for a radio company I still hope Pandora wins just to level the playing field with Satellite Radio which I prefer.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687085</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687213</id>
	<title>Pandora's Box</title>
	<author>gmuslera</author>
	<datestamp>1247513700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You dont know what will come after opening it. Maybe the system could hold it running even with bigger charges, or maybe not, and be the end of radio, RIAA, music as something commercial or most major artists revolt and just put in Creative Commons all their work. Sometimes change end being good in the middle/long run,</htmltext>
<tokenext>You dont know what will come after opening it .
Maybe the system could hold it running even with bigger charges , or maybe not , and be the end of radio , RIAA , music as something commercial or most major artists revolt and just put in Creative Commons all their work .
Sometimes change end being good in the middle/long run,</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You dont know what will come after opening it.
Maybe the system could hold it running even with bigger charges, or maybe not, and be the end of radio, RIAA, music as something commercial or most major artists revolt and just put in Creative Commons all their work.
Sometimes change end being good in the middle/long run,</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28688427</id>
	<title>Re:New Model - Bill everyone</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1247570640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why only once?</p><p>Bill them on the media.<br>Bill them on the Internet connection.<br>Bill them on the computer.<br>Bill them on the downloads.<br>Bill the uploaders.<br>Bill the downloaders.<br>Bill the network providers.<br>Bill the sites hosting directories.<br>Bill them on the concerts.<br>Bill them on the tickets.<br>Bill the artists.<br>Bill the organizer.<br>Bill them all trough a special tax.</p><p>And sue them anyway!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why only once ? Bill them on the media.Bill them on the Internet connection.Bill them on the computer.Bill them on the downloads.Bill the uploaders.Bill the downloaders.Bill the network providers.Bill the sites hosting directories.Bill them on the concerts.Bill them on the tickets.Bill the artists.Bill the organizer.Bill them all trough a special tax.And sue them anyway !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why only once?Bill them on the media.Bill them on the Internet connection.Bill them on the computer.Bill them on the downloads.Bill the uploaders.Bill the downloaders.Bill the network providers.Bill the sites hosting directories.Bill them on the concerts.Bill them on the tickets.Bill the artists.Bill the organizer.Bill them all trough a special tax.And sue them anyway!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686655</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686795</id>
	<title>Re:Contact your state senator!!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247508120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why are so many Americans such fatasses?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why are so many Americans such fatasses ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why are so many Americans such fatasses?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686371</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28688109</id>
	<title>Do as we say, not as we do!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247566920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why shouldn't local broadcast radio in the US pay mechanical royalties?  Radio stations in other countries manage fine and please show me where there's a special exemption for US local radio in the Berne convention.  The US being the country most aggressively persuing "IP" protectionism abroad; this particular double standard goes much, much deeper than broadcast radio.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why should n't local broadcast radio in the US pay mechanical royalties ?
Radio stations in other countries manage fine and please show me where there 's a special exemption for US local radio in the Berne convention .
The US being the country most aggressively persuing " IP " protectionism abroad ; this particular double standard goes much , much deeper than broadcast radio .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why shouldn't local broadcast radio in the US pay mechanical royalties?
Radio stations in other countries manage fine and please show me where there's a special exemption for US local radio in the Berne convention.
The US being the country most aggressively persuing "IP" protectionism abroad; this particular double standard goes much, much deeper than broadcast radio.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687085</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686325</id>
	<title>first</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247504280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>First</p><p>but seriously how about we just wipe out the riaa monop completly</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Firstbut seriously how about we just wipe out the riaa monop completly</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Firstbut seriously how about we just wipe out the riaa monop completly</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28692023</id>
	<title>FM is dead in iStarbucksland</title>
	<author>Ilgaz</author>
	<datestamp>1247590620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Man exactly what kind of Apple planet you live instead of Earth and when did you move?</p><p>FM radio go in way of Dodo etc? Did you lose your mind? No, World doesn't consist of Apple Stores, Star Bucks and similar things. FM radio can't die because 10-20 people around you doesn't have FM radio capability since Apple was really horrified that they may dare to listen to top 40 crap 'free' instead of buying from iTMS. In fact, it will stay as FM form for a long time since every company except Apple fascists are putting FM radio to their low end cell phones these days. There hasn't been more FM capable devices in history than today. For example, Sony Ericsson are famous for putting a full feature (even including RDS) radio to every high end phone they use. My SE P1i phone doesn't just display RDS, it is also capable of "audio fingerprinting" currently playing track on radio (or actually the surrounding) and display it. That is the 'evil Sony!' for you. Now you have base score to see how evil Apple is for not putting a 10 cent chip inside iPod.</p><p>Ask CBS and Clear Channel giants if you want USA centric information about how FM radio is doing. You can also ask British people how "crap" FM sounds like since they didn't move to full digital DAB despite all the push of BBC which does make excellent music broadcast. I mean it is not NPR we talk about, it is the BBC giant. Their (!) DAB has failed because people didn't see (hear) a point. Of course, in British fashion, DAB owners will never get abandoned although DAB couldn't fulfil its promise.</p><p>Some people will always like the music chosen by them, by professionals, with a little chatter and information mixed and even ads. That is why radio survives. It should be dead right when the first 8 track shipped if you think that way. No, some people doesn't really want to bother with ''choice'' etc. too much. They want to hear their taste of music and information with minimum interaction as possible.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Man exactly what kind of Apple planet you live instead of Earth and when did you move ? FM radio go in way of Dodo etc ?
Did you lose your mind ?
No , World does n't consist of Apple Stores , Star Bucks and similar things .
FM radio ca n't die because 10-20 people around you does n't have FM radio capability since Apple was really horrified that they may dare to listen to top 40 crap 'free ' instead of buying from iTMS .
In fact , it will stay as FM form for a long time since every company except Apple fascists are putting FM radio to their low end cell phones these days .
There has n't been more FM capable devices in history than today .
For example , Sony Ericsson are famous for putting a full feature ( even including RDS ) radio to every high end phone they use .
My SE P1i phone does n't just display RDS , it is also capable of " audio fingerprinting " currently playing track on radio ( or actually the surrounding ) and display it .
That is the 'evil Sony !
' for you .
Now you have base score to see how evil Apple is for not putting a 10 cent chip inside iPod.Ask CBS and Clear Channel giants if you want USA centric information about how FM radio is doing .
You can also ask British people how " crap " FM sounds like since they did n't move to full digital DAB despite all the push of BBC which does make excellent music broadcast .
I mean it is not NPR we talk about , it is the BBC giant .
Their ( !
) DAB has failed because people did n't see ( hear ) a point .
Of course , in British fashion , DAB owners will never get abandoned although DAB could n't fulfil its promise.Some people will always like the music chosen by them , by professionals , with a little chatter and information mixed and even ads .
That is why radio survives .
It should be dead right when the first 8 track shipped if you think that way .
No , some people does n't really want to bother with ''choice' ' etc .
too much .
They want to hear their taste of music and information with minimum interaction as possible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Man exactly what kind of Apple planet you live instead of Earth and when did you move?FM radio go in way of Dodo etc?
Did you lose your mind?
No, World doesn't consist of Apple Stores, Star Bucks and similar things.
FM radio can't die because 10-20 people around you doesn't have FM radio capability since Apple was really horrified that they may dare to listen to top 40 crap 'free' instead of buying from iTMS.
In fact, it will stay as FM form for a long time since every company except Apple fascists are putting FM radio to their low end cell phones these days.
There hasn't been more FM capable devices in history than today.
For example, Sony Ericsson are famous for putting a full feature (even including RDS) radio to every high end phone they use.
My SE P1i phone doesn't just display RDS, it is also capable of "audio fingerprinting" currently playing track on radio (or actually the surrounding) and display it.
That is the 'evil Sony!
' for you.
Now you have base score to see how evil Apple is for not putting a 10 cent chip inside iPod.Ask CBS and Clear Channel giants if you want USA centric information about how FM radio is doing.
You can also ask British people how "crap" FM sounds like since they didn't move to full digital DAB despite all the push of BBC which does make excellent music broadcast.
I mean it is not NPR we talk about, it is the BBC giant.
Their (!
) DAB has failed because people didn't see (hear) a point.
Of course, in British fashion, DAB owners will never get abandoned although DAB couldn't fulfil its promise.Some people will always like the music chosen by them, by professionals, with a little chatter and information mixed and even ads.
That is why radio survives.
It should be dead right when the first 8 track shipped if you think that way.
No, some people doesn't really want to bother with ''choice'' etc.
too much.
They want to hear their taste of music and information with minimum interaction as possible.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686557</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28691297</id>
	<title>Re:New Model - Bill everyone</title>
	<author>tonyreadsnews</author>
	<datestamp>1247587440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You forgot
<br> <br>
Profit
<br> <br>
If you can't profit with that many accounts receivable you're really doing something wrong.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You forgot Profit If you ca n't profit with that many accounts receivable you 're really doing something wrong .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You forgot
 
Profit
 
If you can't profit with that many accounts receivable you're really doing something wrong.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686655</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686789</id>
	<title>Re:Contact your state senator!!!</title>
	<author>Logic and Reason</author>
	<datestamp>1247508060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Sure we might lose mainstream music radio, but most of them are Clearchannel anyway.</p></div><p>Except that this will actually help the largest stations by killing off their smaller competitors who can't afford the new fees. If you think things are bad now, just wait until this bill gets passed.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sure we might lose mainstream music radio , but most of them are Clearchannel anyway.Except that this will actually help the largest stations by killing off their smaller competitors who ca n't afford the new fees .
If you think things are bad now , just wait until this bill gets passed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sure we might lose mainstream music radio, but most of them are Clearchannel anyway.Except that this will actually help the largest stations by killing off their smaller competitors who can't afford the new fees.
If you think things are bad now, just wait until this bill gets passed.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686463</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686917</id>
	<title>Gotta agree here</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247509320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If online radio has to pay, and satellite has to pay (for those of you who didn't know that, they do), then broadcast radio should also have to pay.</p><p>Broadcast radio keeps insisting what they want is a level playing field.  Well, it ain't level if they don't have to pay.</p><p>No in between bullshit, all commercial broadcasters should be treated the same, regardless of the actual method of broadcast...either charge no one, or charge everyone.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If online radio has to pay , and satellite has to pay ( for those of you who did n't know that , they do ) , then broadcast radio should also have to pay.Broadcast radio keeps insisting what they want is a level playing field .
Well , it ai n't level if they do n't have to pay.No in between bullshit , all commercial broadcasters should be treated the same , regardless of the actual method of broadcast...either charge no one , or charge everyone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If online radio has to pay, and satellite has to pay (for those of you who didn't know that, they do), then broadcast radio should also have to pay.Broadcast radio keeps insisting what they want is a level playing field.
Well, it ain't level if they don't have to pay.No in between bullshit, all commercial broadcasters should be treated the same, regardless of the actual method of broadcast...either charge no one, or charge everyone.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686557
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687093
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686371
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686631
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686531
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28691931
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686371
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686539
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28693191
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686371
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686463
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687039
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28691435
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686381
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687057
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687775
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28691167
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686399
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28688605
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687085
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28690187
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687061
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28689807
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686655
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28689545
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686371
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686463
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687039
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28688957
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28690707
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686371
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686463
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687039
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28695865
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686371
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686463
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687039
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28690235
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687089
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28701267
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686917
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28705545
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687215
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686371
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687297
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686917
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28690479
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686833
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28691703
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686399
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28692413
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686399
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686601
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686371
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28783611
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686371
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686463
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28702483
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687085
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28701249
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687119
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686557
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686693
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687007
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686833
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28689235
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686833
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28695681
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686655
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28688533
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686655
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28688709
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687085
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28693615
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686371
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686463
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686761
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687173
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686655
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28691297
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686371
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28689479
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687089
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687323
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686371
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686525
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28688243
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687233
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28692381
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686655
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28688377
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28692395
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686375
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28690137
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686833
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28688893
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686655
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687711
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686371
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686463
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686789
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28693103
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686341
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28688081
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686841
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28701213
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686371
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686795
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687085
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28688109
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686841
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28690197
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686833
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28689153
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686531
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28691565
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686655
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687709
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686371
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686883
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686557
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686693
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687421
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686833
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28690793
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686655
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28690323
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686557
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28692023
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686655
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28688427
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_13_2243233_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686805
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28690601
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2243233.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687085
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28688109
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28693615
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28690187
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28701249
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2243233.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686809
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2243233.27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687089
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687323
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28701267
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2243233.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686917
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28705545
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28690479
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2243233.28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686509
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687233
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28692381
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687775
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2243233.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686661
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2243233.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687181
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2243233.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686375
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28690137
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2243233.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686341
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28688081
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2243233.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686713
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2243233.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686531
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28691565
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28691931
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2243233.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686611
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2243233.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687061
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28689807
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2243233.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686545
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2243233.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686325
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2243233.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686555
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2243233.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28688947
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2243233.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686323
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2243233.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686833
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28689153
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28691703
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28689235
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28695681
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28688893
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28690793
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2243233.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686557
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686693
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687421
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687007
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687093
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28692023
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2243233.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686381
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687057
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2243233.25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686841
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28701213
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28690197
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2243233.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686897
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2243233.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686655
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28688709
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28688377
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28692395
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28688533
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28691297
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687709
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28690323
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687711
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28689545
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28688427
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2243233.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686439
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2243233.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686805
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28691167
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687119
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28693191
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28690601
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687215
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2243233.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686445
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2243233.26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686863
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2243233.29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686371
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687297
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686883
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28783611
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686463
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687039
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28688957
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28690707
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28690235
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28695865
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28691435
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686761
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28687173
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686789
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28693103
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28702483
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28689479
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686539
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686525
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28688243
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686795
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686631
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_13_2243233.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686399
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28692413
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28688605
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_13_2243233.28686601
</commentlist>
</conversation>
